The opening of Canada Goose's first retail store in the United States was welcomed with massive protests.

During the four days after Canada Goose opened its first retail store in the United States, animal rights activists staged massive protests at the entrance, dissuading shoppers from entering and shaming those who purchased coats after seeing images of geese and coyotes being terrorized and killed for their feathers and fur.

In this six minute video, Canadian journalist Zach Ruiter captured some of the dramatic encounters between the protesters and Canada Goose customers on the day of the store’s grand opening in New York City.

TheirTurn, which also reported from the grand opening, interviewed actor and comedian Dave Hill, who stopped by with his dog Lucy to lend his support. In addition to criticizing the Canada Goose for engaging in “mass slaughter” while masquerading as a “mom and pop” business, Hill contemplated asking the company, which uses wild dog (coyote) fur, if it would make a coat using Lucy’s fur.

In October, activists with PETA and Direct Action Everywhere (DxE) staged an in-store disruption on the opening day of its first retail store. According to PETA, “25 chanting, poster-wielding PETA supporters and DxE activists descended on the grand opening of Canada Goose’s first-ever brick-and-mortar store in Toronto. Less than a minute after protesters entered the building—where they were immediately locked in by security personnel—the company’s CEO, Dani Reiss, fled to the back of the store.”

Canada Goose is being targeted by animal rights activists because the company sells winter coats stuffed with feathers plucked out of the bodies of geese and lined with the fur of coyotes who are captured in steel leg hold traps. Advocates say that coyotes attempt to chew off their trapped limbs to escape and oftentimes starve to death while waiting for the trapper to shoot them.

Protest on the opening day of the Canada Goose store in NYC

The red and blue Canada Goose badge on the coats has become a status symbol in urban areas. Activists are working to ensure that customers, some of whom don’t realize they are wearing real fur, know that they’re wearing a “badge of terror.”

Activists help Canada Goose customers connect the dots between their dogs who they love and the dogs who they’re wearing.

The opening of Canada Goose's first retail store in the United States was welcomed with massive protests.

During the four days after Canada Goose opened its first retail store in the United States, animal rights activists staged massive protests at the entrance, dissuading shoppers from entering and shaming those who purchased coats after seeing images of geese and coyotes being terrorized and killed for their feathers and fur.

In this six minute video, Canadian journalist Zach Ruiter captured some of the dramatic encounters between the protesters and Canada Goose customers on the day of the store’s grand opening in New York City.

TheirTurn, which also reported from the grand opening, interviewed actor and comedian Dave Hill, who stopped by with his dog Lucy to lend his support. In addition to criticizing the Canada Goose for engaging in “mass slaughter” while masquerading as a “mom and pop” business, Hill contemplated asking the company, which uses wild dog (coyote) fur, if it would make a coat using Lucy’s fur.

In October, activists with PETA and Direct Action Everywhere (DxE) staged an in-store disruption on the opening day of its first retail store. According to PETA, “25 chanting, poster-wielding PETA supporters and DxE activists descended on the grand opening of Canada Goose’s first-ever brick-and-mortar store in Toronto. Less than a minute after protesters entered the building—where they were immediately locked in by security personnel—the company’s CEO, Dani Reiss, fled to the back of the store.”

Canada Goose is being targeted by animal rights activists because the company sells winter coats stuffed with feathers plucked out of the bodies of geese and lined with the fur of coyotes who are captured in steel leg hold traps. Advocates say that coyotes attempt to chew off their trapped limbs to escape and oftentimes starve to death while waiting for the trapper to shoot them.

Protest on the opening day of the Canada Goose store in NYC

The red and blue Canada Goose badge on the coats has become a status symbol in urban areas. Activists are working to ensure that customers, some of whom don’t realize they are wearing real fur, know that they’re wearing a “badge of terror.”

Activists help Canada Goose customers connect the dots between their dogs who they love and the dogs who they’re wearing.

]]>
http://www.alternet.org/comics/alternet-comics-jen-sorensen-social-movements-try-not-offendAlterNet Comics: Jen Sorensen on Social Movements That Try Not to Offendhttp://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/239421772/0/alternet_activism~AlterNet-Comics-Jen-Sorensen-on-Social-Movements-That-Try-Not-to-Offend

From the outset, Jared Kushner's New York Observer has been an instrument of the Trump campaign.

The New York Observer, a newspaper owned by Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, published an opinion piece Friday calling for the FBI to launch a coordinated crackdown on nationwide anti-Trump protests, mobilizations and recount efforts.

Titled “Comey’s FBI Needs to Investigate Violent Democratic Tantrums,” the article was written by Austin Bay, a retired U.S. Army Reserve colonel and adjunct professor at the University of Texas in Austin.

Kushner, who is married to Ivanka Trump, purchased a majority stake in the New York Observer in 2006 for roughly $10 million and currently operates as the outlet’s publisher.

Bay’s opinion piece appeals to FBI director James Comey to “conduct a detailed investigation into the violence and political thuggery that continue to mar the presidential election’s aftermath,” including a “thorough probe of the protests—to include possible ties to organizations demanding vote recounts.”

“The hard left’s violent reaction to Donald Trump’s election is vile and dangerous,” writes Bay. “Peaceful protests? No, the demonstrators vandalize and destroy. They have two goals: intimidating people and sustaining the mainstream media lie that Donald Trump is dangerous.”

The piece raises fears of “communists,” smears the Black Lives Matter movement as violent and even raises alarm about the multi-billionaire George Soros. “Sure, there are a lot of fringe theories out there about Soros,” writes Bay. “But Soros has a record for funding leftist political action.”

Bay also tars grassroots campaigns urging electors to honor the popular vote and keep Trump from the White House. “Reports that members of the Electoral College are being harassed and threatened by angry, vicious (and likely Democratic Party) malcontents require Comey’s quick and systematic attention,” Bay writes.

Jim Naureckas, editor of Extra!, the media watchdog magazine of Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting, told AlterNet that Bay's op-ed is one of the most disturbing things he has seen since the election. “To have the incoming ruler’s son-in-law using his paper to call for the federal police to investigate protests against the ruler, that is pretty far gone,” he said. “It struck me as a ‘first they came for the communists’ moment.”

“He ties up this conspiracy of protesters, people seeking recounts and George Soros into one vast conspiracy that the FBI ought to get to the bottom of,” Naureckas continued. “It shows you the outlines of how you would justify a complete crackdown on dissent. It’s frightening.”

Naureckas said it does not matter that Kushner himself did not write the piece. “This publication is literally in the family,” he said. “This paper has been an organ of the Trump movement from the beginning, and it is owned by one of the closest confidants Trump has. The idea of sending the secret police after protesters is an incredibly dangerous idea, and it must be repudiated.”

The opinion piece comes amid mounting concerns over the incoming administration of Trump, who has vowed to ban Muslims from entering the country, carry out torture, deport more than 11 million immigrants and crack down on the free press by "open[ing] up" libel laws. So far, Trump has unveiled an alarming bevy of far-right administration appointees, including White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, who headed the white nationalist publication Breitbart, and Attorney General nominee Jeff Sessions, who was deemed too racist to serve as a federal judge under the Reagan administration.

Throughout his campaign, Trump repeatedly incited violence against anti-racist protesters at his rallies. In February, Trump said of a protester at one of his Las Vegas campaign events, “I’d like to punch him in the face.” He added that, “in the old days,” such protesters would be “carried out in stretchers.”

When protests swept the country following Trump’s victory in the electoral college, Trump took to Twitter to condemn the mobilizations as “very unfair” and falsely painted participants as paid agents who are “incited by the media.”

Meanwhile, in the aftermath of the election there has been a spike in hate crimes across the country. The Southern Poverty Law Center documents at least 867 “post-election hate incidents,” noting that “K-12 settings and colleges” have been “the most common venues for hate incidents.” The hate crime monitoring organization notes that this is likely a drastic undercount, as not all such incidents are reported to authorities.

Stephen Zunes, a professor of politics and international studies at the University of San Francisco, told AlterNet that the demonstrations that the New York Observer article took aim at “are constitutionally protected exercises in free speech.” He warned that, “Combined with the recent bipartisan legislation in Congress to crack down on pro-Palestinian activism on college campuses, this may presage a serious crackdown on civil liberties in the coming years.”

From the outset, Jared Kushner's New York Observer has been an instrument of the Trump campaign.

The New York Observer, a newspaper owned by Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, published an opinion piece Friday calling for the FBI to launch a coordinated crackdown on nationwide anti-Trump protests, mobilizations and recount efforts.

Titled “Comey’s FBI Needs to Investigate Violent Democratic Tantrums,” the article was written by Austin Bay, a retired U.S. Army Reserve colonel and adjunct professor at the University of Texas in Austin.

Kushner, who is married to Ivanka Trump, purchased a majority stake in the New York Observer in 2006 for roughly $10 million and currently operates as the outlet’s publisher.

Bay’s opinion piece appeals to FBI director James Comey to “conduct a detailed investigation into the violence and political thuggery that continue to mar the presidential election’s aftermath,” including a “thorough probe of the protests—to include possible ties to organizations demanding vote recounts.”

“The hard left’s violent reaction to Donald Trump’s election is vile and dangerous,” writes Bay. “Peaceful protests? No, the demonstrators vandalize and destroy. They have two goals: intimidating people and sustaining the mainstream media lie that Donald Trump is dangerous.”

The piece raises fears of “communists,” smears the Black Lives Matter movement as violent and even raises alarm about the multi-billionaire George Soros. “Sure, there are a lot of fringe theories out there about Soros,” writes Bay. “But Soros has a record for funding leftist political action.”

Bay also tars grassroots campaigns urging electors to honor the popular vote and keep Trump from the White House. “Reports that members of the Electoral College are being harassed and threatened by angry, vicious (and likely Democratic Party) malcontents require Comey’s quick and systematic attention,” Bay writes.

Jim Naureckas, editor of Extra!, the media watchdog magazine of Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting, told AlterNet that Bay's op-ed is one of the most disturbing things he has seen since the election. “To have the incoming ruler’s son-in-law using his paper to call for the federal police to investigate protests against the ruler, that is pretty far gone,” he said. “It struck me as a ‘first they came for the communists’ moment.”

“He ties up this conspiracy of protesters, people seeking recounts and George Soros into one vast conspiracy that the FBI ought to get to the bottom of,” Naureckas continued. “It shows you the outlines of how you would justify a complete crackdown on dissent. It’s frightening.”

Naureckas said it does not matter that Kushner himself did not write the piece. “This publication is literally in the family,” he said. “This paper has been an organ of the Trump movement from the beginning, and it is owned by one of the closest confidants Trump has. The idea of sending the secret police after protesters is an incredibly dangerous idea, and it must be repudiated.”

The opinion piece comes amid mounting concerns over the incoming administration of Trump, who has vowed to ban Muslims from entering the country, carry out torture, deport more than 11 million immigrants and crack down on the free press by "open[ing] up" libel laws. So far, Trump has unveiled an alarming bevy of far-right administration appointees, including White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, who headed the white nationalist publication Breitbart, and Attorney General nominee Jeff Sessions, who was deemed too racist to serve as a federal judge under the Reagan administration.

Throughout his campaign, Trump repeatedly incited violence against anti-racist protesters at his rallies. In February, Trump said of a protester at one of his Las Vegas campaign events, “I’d like to punch him in the face.” He added that, “in the old days,” such protesters would be “carried out in stretchers.”

When protests swept the country following Trump’s victory in the electoral college, Trump took to Twitter to condemn the mobilizations as “very unfair” and falsely painted participants as paid agents who are “incited by the media.”

Meanwhile, in the aftermath of the election there has been a spike in hate crimes across the country. The Southern Poverty Law Center documents at least 867 “post-election hate incidents,” noting that “K-12 settings and colleges” have been “the most common venues for hate incidents.” The hate crime monitoring organization notes that this is likely a drastic undercount, as not all such incidents are reported to authorities.

Stephen Zunes, a professor of politics and international studies at the University of San Francisco, told AlterNet that the demonstrations that the New York Observer article took aim at “are constitutionally protected exercises in free speech.” He warned that, “Combined with the recent bipartisan legislation in Congress to crack down on pro-Palestinian activism on college campuses, this may presage a serious crackdown on civil liberties in the coming years.”

]]>
http://www.alternet.org/environment/hero-animals-or-eco-terrorist-one-mans-lifelong-mission-be-voice-wildHero for Animals or Eco-Terrorist? One Man's Lifelong Mission to Be a Voice for the Wildhttp://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/238744956/0/alternet_activism~Hero-for-Animals-or-EcoTerrorist-One-Mans-Lifelong-Mission-to-Be-a-Voice-for-the-Wild

From sinking whaling ships to rescuing minks from fur farms, Rod Coronado has devoted his life to protecting wildlife.

Depending on who you talk to, Rod Coronado is either a true American revolutionary or one of the world’s most infamous eco-terrorists. Coronado, a member of the Pascua Yaqui tribe, has dedicated his life to being “a voice for the wild” by sabotaging commercial enterprises such as whaling ships and fur farms, and the universities that support their work. While this choice may have benefited the causes Coronado champions, he has also endured more than six years in prison, convicted of what the government calls crimes of conspiracy and sabotage. He calls it “direct action.”

A free man again, Coronado is now the leader of Wolf Patrol, an organization that supports recovery of gray wolves in the lower 48 states. While his methods now tend to fall on the legal side of things, to say Coronado has mellowed would be incorrect. I sat down with Coronado to discuss his past direct actions, the demonization of wolves and what people can do to help wild animals.

Brian Whitney: You have described yourself as a 'contemporary revolutionary.' How did you first become involved in activism?

Rod Coronado: I first became involved with activism when I was 12 years old after being exposed to the ways humans commercially exploit wildlife. Whaling, seal hunts and trapping were the issues that demanded action within myself, so I joined the only group I could find that was actually trying to stop these things: Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. I approved of their direct action approach, such as Sea Shepherd’s Paul Watson's ramming—and later sinking—of the world's most notorious pirate whaling ship, the Sierra, in 1979.

BW: You sank a few whaling ships yourself when you were a teenage member of Sea Shepherd. Can you talk a little bit about what their goals were?

RC: In 1986, I was 19 years old. A few years earlies, anti-whaling activists had achieved a monumental victory with the passage of the International Whaling Commission's ban on commercial whaling. This was the product of years of lobbying and hard work by international activists and it was immediately called into question by countries such as Japan and Iceland, who vowed to violate the ban and continue whaling. We acted by sabotaging Iceland’s only whaling station and sinking two of the whaling ships that had carried out the violation.

Rod Coronado in the Salmon-Challis National Forest in Idaho, while investigating a federal Wildlife Services lethal control order on wolves accused of killing sheep grazed on public lands. (photo: Joe Brown)

BW: You were also involved with the Animal Liberation Front, a clandestine, leaderless animal rights group that the FBI called a 'serious domestic terrorist threat.' What are ALF’s goals and what exactly did you do as a member?

RC: I led an active cell for many years. The way I was taught, ALF began as a British movement, whose goals were simple: rescue animals from abuse and cause economic damage to those abusing them. For my cell, the Western Wildlife Unit of the ALF, this meant carrying out a nationwide campaign of sabotage against universities and commercial enterprises engaged in the raising of animals for their fur.

We targeted mink and fox farms, where tens of thousands of animals are held in tiny cages until they are gassed for their fur. We targeted commercial feed suppliers to these fur farms. We targeted universities engaged in research to eliminate obstacles to the fur farm industry. We acted not as animal rights activists or environmental extremists, but as warriors who had committed our lives to the elimination of suffering and abuse that we saw within our sphere of being.

BW: One of the criticisms of ALF is that sometimes they break into fur farms and simply release the animals into the wild, though these animals are unequipped to survive in the wild. Is that something that ALF has considered?

RC: That was a big question we often addressed. Economically speaking, you can do great damage to a fur farm simply by releasing the animals. But I've been on dozens of these farms before, and I know that if you release 5,000 mink in one place, they are going to fight and kill each other, not to mention decimate the local prey population. This is why I never did this. Instead, I've taken mink, bobcats and lynx and rehabilitated them before releasing them in small numbers back into their natural environment. As an ALF warrior, I believed it was our job to provide more security to fur farm prisoners than simply opening their cell door.

BW: What is the biggest misconception that people have about animal rights?

RC: I've given up on "animal rights," because it’s not a biocentric movement. Biocentrism recognizes the impact human activity has on all life, not just animals. I don't believe someone is absolved of animal suffering just because they are vegan. Living in a developed nation like the U.S., there are many ways we contribute to suffering beyond our choice in diet. If someone truly believed in animal rights, they couldn't live peacefully or sanely, knowing what is being done to animals, they would take action—direct action.

So if you call yourself an animal rights activist, in my opinion, you are committing to do more than just using your first-world privilege to make different consumer choices. You are saying that the treatment of animals in our society is unacceptable and you are going to do more than just pass judgment on Facebook.

BW: What is the easiest thing the average person/consumer can do to help animals?

RC: Stand up for them as if they were your own family members. I know people want to hear “stop eating them,” but it’s not that easy. I see vegans all the time who go to extreme limits to observe their veganism, but think little of the fossil fuel industry they still support, or question their (mostly) white privilege that still separates them from the natural world and recognizing how much violence they still benefit from by being a privileged first-worlder. Everything we consume is the product of suffering, just some products less than others.

BW: You have done some very extreme things in your past in the name of your causes. Many people, no matter what their cause, like to talk about what they believe in, but are unwilling to put their freedom on the line for it.

RC: We have an obligation to act against wanton violence and destruction, whether it be legal or not. You can rationalize against it, because that's the only thing someone can do to absolve themselves of that responsibility. You have kids. You have your job. You have your degree to work on. But those are all excuses because you know, deep in your heart, what you should be doing. Frankly, I have little faith in the human race, which is why I have chosen to fight for other species. Action, not words, is what the world needs most right now.

BW: In 2006, you sent an open letter to supporters from prison arguing for social change without using violence or destruction as an activist tactic. How did your experience in prison change you?

RC: Prison was a very traumatic experience. It also was my greatest fear, beyond even death. I knew if I followed my heart, and did the things I knew I must—whether as a member of Sea Shepherd, ALF or under any other name—that I would most likely go to prison. So I did, four different times, for a total of six years. We live in a world where laws say you are a terrorist if you free an animal from an abusive situation. You are a criminal if you release an animal from a cruel trap. These are the rules under "the invader,” and such is the situation for all indigenous traditionalists, who believe in their own world instead of that forced down our throats through centuries of colonization and oppression. So my choice is to do as I desire and spend the rest of my life in prison, or find a way to fight that allows me to stay free. It’s purely a cost/benefit analysis. I am worth more to the wolves free than in prison. So prison has taught me that we have to evolve and learn how to fight in new ways.

BW: It says on Wolf Patrol’s website that you advocate for 'wildlife being a public trust resource, that belongs to no one human demographic, but to the entire biological community.' Can you break that down a bit?

RC: Wolf Patrol's constituents are not our financial donors or other humans, but the wolves themselves. We choose to represent them as they are, not as humans define them. They are apex predators, with a vital role in maintaining a healthy environment. Wolves deserve to exist for their own reasons, not because of the economic benefits of hunting or watching them, but because they have their own genetic calling, which tells them to return to, where they were once hunted to extinction.

I personally don't care how many cows, sheep or hunting dogs are killed by wolves, because those animals do not belong on the landscape in the first place, except to serve the needs of one species: us. Wolf Patrol is simply a voice for the wild.

BW: Wolves are regularly demonized in the media and popular culture. What is the biggest misconception that people have about wolves and what can be done to rehabilitate their image?

RC: I think the same misconceptions about wolves that led to their extinction last century, are still being promoted and believed today, largely because of the traditional Christian belief that animals exist for human purposes and do not have worth independent of humans. The only difference between then and now is that now we are seeing those misconceptions acted on in a very modern manner. So, rather than wanton slaughter, we see “managed harvests” of wolves.

Many people still fear wolves, simply because they are a large predator acting outside of human control. What we can do to change that is to educate young people, especially those living in wolf territory, about wolf ecology and all the “new” things we are learning about wolves and other animals. People are still very human-centric and do not view the natural world as its own community, living independent of humans. Until we change the way we view the natural world, we as a species will continue to treat it as property.

From sinking whaling ships to rescuing minks from fur farms, Rod Coronado has devoted his life to protecting wildlife.

Depending on who you talk to, Rod Coronado is either a true American revolutionary or one of the world’s most infamous eco-terrorists. Coronado, a member of the Pascua Yaqui tribe, has dedicated his life to being “a voice for the wild” by sabotaging commercial enterprises such as whaling ships and fur farms, and the universities that support their work. While this choice may have benefited the causes Coronado champions, he has also endured more than six years in prison, convicted of what the government calls crimes of conspiracy and sabotage. He calls it “direct action.”

A free man again, Coronado is now the leader of Wolf Patrol, an organization that supports recovery of gray wolves in the lower 48 states. While his methods now tend to fall on the legal side of things, to say Coronado has mellowed would be incorrect. I sat down with Coronado to discuss his past direct actions, the demonization of wolves and what people can do to help wild animals.

Brian Whitney: You have described yourself as a 'contemporary revolutionary.' How did you first become involved in activism?

Rod Coronado: I first became involved with activism when I was 12 years old after being exposed to the ways humans commercially exploit wildlife. Whaling, seal hunts and trapping were the issues that demanded action within myself, so I joined the only group I could find that was actually trying to stop these things: Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. I approved of their direct action approach, such as Sea Shepherd’s Paul Watson's ramming—and later sinking—of the world's most notorious pirate whaling ship, the Sierra, in 1979.

BW: You sank a few whaling ships yourself when you were a teenage member of Sea Shepherd. Can you talk a little bit about what their goals were?

RC: In 1986, I was 19 years old. A few years earlies, anti-whaling activists had achieved a monumental victory with the passage of the International Whaling Commission's ban on commercial whaling. This was the product of years of lobbying and hard work by international activists and it was immediately called into question by countries such as Japan and Iceland, who vowed to violate the ban and continue whaling. We acted by sabotaging Iceland’s only whaling station and sinking two of the whaling ships that had carried out the violation.

Rod Coronado in the Salmon-Challis National Forest in Idaho, while investigating a federal Wildlife Services lethal control order on wolves accused of killing sheep grazed on public lands. (photo: Joe Brown)

BW: You were also involved with the Animal Liberation Front, a clandestine, leaderless animal rights group that the FBI called a 'serious domestic terrorist threat.' What are ALF’s goals and what exactly did you do as a member?

RC: I led an active cell for many years. The way I was taught, ALF began as a British movement, whose goals were simple: rescue animals from abuse and cause economic damage to those abusing them. For my cell, the Western Wildlife Unit of the ALF, this meant carrying out a nationwide campaign of sabotage against universities and commercial enterprises engaged in the raising of animals for their fur.

We targeted mink and fox farms, where tens of thousands of animals are held in tiny cages until they are gassed for their fur. We targeted commercial feed suppliers to these fur farms. We targeted universities engaged in research to eliminate obstacles to the fur farm industry. We acted not as animal rights activists or environmental extremists, but as warriors who had committed our lives to the elimination of suffering and abuse that we saw within our sphere of being.

BW: One of the criticisms of ALF is that sometimes they break into fur farms and simply release the animals into the wild, though these animals are unequipped to survive in the wild. Is that something that ALF has considered?

RC: That was a big question we often addressed. Economically speaking, you can do great damage to a fur farm simply by releasing the animals. But I've been on dozens of these farms before, and I know that if you release 5,000 mink in one place, they are going to fight and kill each other, not to mention decimate the local prey population. This is why I never did this. Instead, I've taken mink, bobcats and lynx and rehabilitated them before releasing them in small numbers back into their natural environment. As an ALF warrior, I believed it was our job to provide more security to fur farm prisoners than simply opening their cell door.

BW: What is the biggest misconception that people have about animal rights?

RC: I've given up on "animal rights," because it’s not a biocentric movement. Biocentrism recognizes the impact human activity has on all life, not just animals. I don't believe someone is absolved of animal suffering just because they are vegan. Living in a developed nation like the U.S., there are many ways we contribute to suffering beyond our choice in diet. If someone truly believed in animal rights, they couldn't live peacefully or sanely, knowing what is being done to animals, they would take action—direct action.

So if you call yourself an animal rights activist, in my opinion, you are committing to do more than just using your first-world privilege to make different consumer choices. You are saying that the treatment of animals in our society is unacceptable and you are going to do more than just pass judgment on Facebook.

BW: What is the easiest thing the average person/consumer can do to help animals?

RC: Stand up for them as if they were your own family members. I know people want to hear “stop eating them,” but it’s not that easy. I see vegans all the time who go to extreme limits to observe their veganism, but think little of the fossil fuel industry they still support, or question their (mostly) white privilege that still separates them from the natural world and recognizing how much violence they still benefit from by being a privileged first-worlder. Everything we consume is the product of suffering, just some products less than others.

BW: You have done some very extreme things in your past in the name of your causes. Many people, no matter what their cause, like to talk about what they believe in, but are unwilling to put their freedom on the line for it.

RC: We have an obligation to act against wanton violence and destruction, whether it be legal or not. You can rationalize against it, because that's the only thing someone can do to absolve themselves of that responsibility. You have kids. You have your job. You have your degree to work on. But those are all excuses because you know, deep in your heart, what you should be doing. Frankly, I have little faith in the human race, which is why I have chosen to fight for other species. Action, not words, is what the world needs most right now.

BW: In 2006, you sent an open letter to supporters from prison arguing for social change without using violence or destruction as an activist tactic. How did your experience in prison change you?

RC: Prison was a very traumatic experience. It also was my greatest fear, beyond even death. I knew if I followed my heart, and did the things I knew I must—whether as a member of Sea Shepherd, ALF or under any other name—that I would most likely go to prison. So I did, four different times, for a total of six years. We live in a world where laws say you are a terrorist if you free an animal from an abusive situation. You are a criminal if you release an animal from a cruel trap. These are the rules under "the invader,” and such is the situation for all indigenous traditionalists, who believe in their own world instead of that forced down our throats through centuries of colonization and oppression. So my choice is to do as I desire and spend the rest of my life in prison, or find a way to fight that allows me to stay free. It’s purely a cost/benefit analysis. I am worth more to the wolves free than in prison. So prison has taught me that we have to evolve and learn how to fight in new ways.

BW: It says on Wolf Patrol’s website that you advocate for 'wildlife being a public trust resource, that belongs to no one human demographic, but to the entire biological community.' Can you break that down a bit?

RC: Wolf Patrol's constituents are not our financial donors or other humans, but the wolves themselves. We choose to represent them as they are, not as humans define them. They are apex predators, with a vital role in maintaining a healthy environment. Wolves deserve to exist for their own reasons, not because of the economic benefits of hunting or watching them, but because they have their own genetic calling, which tells them to return to, where they were once hunted to extinction.

I personally don't care how many cows, sheep or hunting dogs are killed by wolves, because those animals do not belong on the landscape in the first place, except to serve the needs of one species: us. Wolf Patrol is simply a voice for the wild.

BW: Wolves are regularly demonized in the media and popular culture. What is the biggest misconception that people have about wolves and what can be done to rehabilitate their image?

RC: I think the same misconceptions about wolves that led to their extinction last century, are still being promoted and believed today, largely because of the traditional Christian belief that animals exist for human purposes and do not have worth independent of humans. The only difference between then and now is that now we are seeing those misconceptions acted on in a very modern manner. So, rather than wanton slaughter, we see “managed harvests” of wolves.

Many people still fear wolves, simply because they are a large predator acting outside of human control. What we can do to change that is to educate young people, especially those living in wolf territory, about wolf ecology and all the “new” things we are learning about wolves and other animals. People are still very human-centric and do not view the natural world as its own community, living independent of humans. Until we change the way we view the natural world, we as a species will continue to treat it as property.

]]>
http://www.alternet.org/food/12-reasons-why-you-should-be-extremely-concerned-about-tyson-foods12 Reasons Why You Should Be Extremely Concerned About Tyson Foodshttp://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/239120166/0/alternet_activism~Reasons-Why-You-Should-Be-Extremely-Concerned-About-Tyson-Foods

Tyson Foods, in its over 80 years of operation, has had a hugely negative impact on our food system. Tyson Foods profits off the cheap land and cheap labor that grease the wheels of the industrial food complex, specializing in the production of packaged “food” made with conflict palm oil and factory farmed meat. Palm oil is an ingredient in at least 36 Tyson products.

Tyson Foods and its global subsidiaries are one of the world's largest producers of chicken, beef, and pork––entirely raised and processed in industrial operations. It's also well known for its popular “prepared foods” like Sara Lee baked apple pies which contain conflict palm oil. As the parent company of numerous sub-brands, including "Snack Food 20" laggard Hillshire Brands, it markets leading brands such as Tyson, Jimmy Dean, Hillshire Farm, Sara Lee, Ball Park, Wright, Aidells and State Fair.

Here are 12 reasons why we should all be extremely concerned about Tyson Foods.

1. Industrial food production.

A very small number of corporations control the vast majority of the world's food trade: four companies produce more than 58 percent of the world's seeds; four global firms account for 97 percent of poultry genetics research and development; and yet another four produce more than 60 percent of the agrochemicals farmers use.

Chickens raised in factory farms live in filthy, overcrowded conditions as seen by the battery cages above. 8.5 billion chickens are killed each year in the US alone and processed in factory farms. (Photo credit: Wikipedia commons)

2. Corporate consolidation.

Unchecked corporate consolidation has driven out much of the diversity in the marketplace and food system, creating powerful agribusiness giants who control much of what ends up on our plate. Big Ag controls over 83 percent of all foods in the U.S. marketplace, dictating much of what is available in the market. Tyson’s buyout of Snack Food 20 laggard Hillshire Brands marks one of the biggest mergers in the packaged food industry and establishes Tyson firmly in the top two companies by sales in the global processed meat market.

Unchecked corporate consolidation has driven out much of the diversity in the marketplace and food system (Photo credit: Lyza / Flickr)

3. Labor rights abuses for conflict palm oil.

The palm oil industry is rife with forced and child labor. Because Tyson Foods lacks an adequate palm oil procurement policy, it is at extreme risk of sourcing palm oil from companies that are violating the rights of workers. Tyson Foods does not disclose its suppliers, but could have ties to IOI Group, FELDA, or Kuala Lumpur Kepong (KLK)––companies that have been exposed for their exploitative labor practices.

Recent reports have exposed labor exploitation on plantations owned by palm oil giant Indofood, which is a current member of the RSPO and continues to be certified as “sustainable.” This case and others show that Tyson Foods can not rely on this flawed certification system to ensure that it is not connected to companies that are cheating workers out of fair pay and benefits, threatening workers’ health with toxic chemicals, or compelling workers to hire children and bring their spouses to work through an unjust wage system.

The meat and poultry industry has one of the highest rates of injury and illness of any industry according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, and the U.S. Department of Labor calculates that poultry workers are injured five times more than other workers. Despite increasing production line speeds, Tyson’s poultry workers are routinely denied bathroom breaks, and resort to wearing diapers.

The company fails to provide adequate medical care to injured workers, under reports incidents of injury and illness, and denies responsibility for workers who become injured or disabled. The company is routinely fined by the federal government for refusing to pay overtime wages.

Poultry workers suffer amputations at three times the rate for all workers—higher than even high-risk occupations like mining. Latina guest worker employee on rapidly moving chicken processing line, Montgomery, Alabama. (Photo credit:EarlDotter.com)

5. Displacing family farmers for conflict palm oil.

Tyson Foods lacks a palm oil policy strong enough to ensure it does not source conflict palm oil. It is estimated that 2.5 million Dayak Indigenous people in Borneo alone have been displaced to make way for industrial commodity production, namely for conflict palm oil plantations, which produce palm oil that then may be used in products like Sara Lee baked pies.

In Indonesia, more than 700 land conflicts are related to the palm oil industry.

Monocrop palm oil plantations cover more than 27 million hectares of the Earth’s surface. Lush rainforests are destroyed and replaced by biological deserts void of biodiversity. (Photo credit: Nanang Sujana)

6. Displacing family farmers for industrial meat.

In 1950, 95 percent of broiler chicken farms were independent in the U.S. Just five years later, independent farms only accounted for 10 percent of the industry, with most growers selling their goods under contract with a company.

Today, 97 percent of chickens are produced on contract farms, in a system completely rigged in favor of large corporate processors. With less than 2 million family farms surviving in the U.S. today, the once-thriving more than 6 million family farms have been decimated by powerful corporations such as Tyson Foods.

The little red barn on Tyson’s Hillshire Farm label is misleading: not a single one of its farm animals is raised on pasture. Tyson Foods is driving the explosion of factory farming around the world. (Photo credit: Frances Gunn)

7. Antibiotic resistance.

Seventy to 80 percent of all antibiotics in the U.S. are used in the industrial production of animals for food. These lifesaving drugs are routinely fed to animals that are not sick in order to speed up growth and prevent diseases that easily spread in crowded, filthy factory farms.

Public health agencies have declared antibiotic resistance a top health threat in the U.S., and the rampant misuse of antibiotics in animal agriculture is the main culprit. Even though Tyson enacted a policy that has it phasing out antibiotics for poultry in 2017, it has no such commitments for its beef and pork operations.

Given that Tyson has the biggest U.S. market share in poultry and beef (21 percent and 24 percent, respectively) and the third largest in pork (17 percent), Tyson must do better.

70-80% of all antibiotics in the U.S. are used in the industrial production of animals for food. (Photo credit: Melkkarussell plant by Gunnar Richter)

8. Animal rights abuses for conflict palm oil.

As with the previous points, there are many layers of abuse to uncover. Conflict palm oil in Hillshire products is driving extinction: expansion of conflict palm oil is one of the greatest threats to the survival of many critically endangered species in Indonesia and Malaysia such as elephants, rhinos and orangutans.

Animal rights abuses for industrial meat: In Tyson Foods’ own facilities, undercover investigations have documented blatant abuse of animals. In a recent investigation, a Tyson supervisor at a chicken factory is documented standing on birds’ heads to kill them, telling other workers to do the same. The footage documents workers punching and kicking birds, running them over with forklifts, swinging them around by their wings and violently slamming them into cages.

These chickens never see sunlight or breath fresh air, and often suffer from crippling leg deformities. Before making it to the dinner plate, many chickens die slow, painful deaths from a number of diseases directly resulting from the filthy, overcrowded conditions of Tyson’s factory farms.

Captured with a hidden camera in a recent investigation, a Tyson supervisor at a chicken factory stands on live chicken’s head to kill it, telling other workers to do the same. (Photo credit: Mercy for Animals)

9. Conflict palm oil in factory farms.

While palm oil is largely used in food and household products, another product from the oil palm tree called palm kernel meal is often used as feed in commercial meat operations. Palm kernel meal is a commodity known for its cheap price and high cost to the environment, and feeding it to animals in factory farms is a double whammy for the climate.

What’s more, corn and soy, in addition to palm kernel meal, are all common ingredients in animal feed, and are unhealthy for both the livestock forced to eat them and the planet. Although Tyson Foods has a position statement on palm oil, Tyson Foods does not have a policy in regards to its feed, and stands at risk of destroying the world’s forests for its animal feed.

Palm kernel meal is a commodity known for its cheap price and high cost to the environment, and feeding it to animals in factory farms is a double whammy for the climate. (Photo credit: Agricultural Research Service, the research agency of the United States Department of Agriculture)

10. Deforestation risk.

The livestock sector is a major driver of tropical deforestation globally. Raising livestock and growing feed crops is the biggest driver of tropical deforestation in South America. In Brazil for instance, 75 percent of deforestation has been linked to the cattle industry.

Much of the rest is coming from the conversion of forests for soy production, which is then used in farm animal feed. Given that Tyson operates major beef production facilities in China and that Brazil is a major soy exporter to the country (more than 50 percent of the soy produced by Brazil is exported to China), there is a huge risk that Tyson is using soy in animal feed that is linked to deforestation.

Tyson, a company that supplies to the likes of McDonald’s, Popeyes, and KFC (Yum Brands!), should have a policy to address these risks for its global operations.

A soya plantation in Mato Grosso, Brazil. The conversion of forests for soy production, which is then used in livestock feed, is one of the reasons that the livestock sector is a leading driver of global deforestation and the #1 driver in South America. (Photo credit: Lou Dematteis)

11. Water pollution and usage.

In the U.S., Tyson pollutes more water than Cargill (the world’s largest privately owned company) and ExxonMobil (the world's largest publicly traded international oil and gas company) put together. Tyson's pollution has been the subject of several legal challenges over the years, with the company paying more than $25 million in legal settlements and fines since 2001.

Most recently, the Attorney General of Missouri filed a lawsuit against Tyson Foods accusing the company of illegally discharging untreated wastewater that led to the death of up to 100,000 fish. Tyson settled with the state of Missouri in 2015 and agreed to pay $162,898 for natural resource damage, $110,000 in civil penalties, and reimbursed the Missouri Department of Conservation more than $36,000.

In the U.S., Tyson pollutes more water than Cargill (the world’s largest privately owned company) and ExxonMobil (the world's largest publicly traded international oil and gas company) put together. Earlier this year Waterkeeper Alliance and Environmental Working Group (EWG) released a map revealing the (many hidden) locations of more than 6,500 cattle, pig and chicken CAFOs (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations), across the state of North Carolina Environmental Working Group (EWG). (Photo credit: Waterkeeper Alliance.)

12. Climate emissions.

The global food system is responsible for roughly 30 percent of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions––a major contributor for an increasingly unstable climate. These GHG emissions are produced largely by converting land for agricultural use, particularly from converting forest into farmland for industrial palm oil plantations or the production of feed crops, like soy and corn. Within the agricultural industry at large, the livestock sector is a major contributor to the emission of greenhouse gases, representing 14.5 percent of human-induced GHG emissions.

In addition to that, tropical deforestation and forest degradation are responsible for around 15 percent of global GHG emissions; commercial agriculture, largely for export markets, is the primary driver of tropical deforestation. As a major company in the global food system, Tyson’s industrial cattle, chicken and pig operations, as well as the palm oil-laden products it markets, are taking a major toll on the climate.

Palm oil companies illegally burn forests to prepare land for plantations, emitting a thick haze of smoke that shuts down regional air traffic and provokes public health alerts in urban areas hundreds of miles away. Indonesia is the world’s third largest emitter of greenhouse gasses after the U.S. and China, with 85 percent of its emissions profile coming from rainforest and peatland degradation. (Photo credit: Paul Hilton)

Take action

As a matter of urgency, parent company Tyson Foods and the companies it owns like Hillshire Brands Company, must adopt a responsible food policy with commitments on responsible production of two controversial commodities rampant in its supply chain––palm oil and meat.

Tyson Foods is a laggard company with a weak palm oil commitment that relies solely on the inadequate Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) certification system and lacks requirements for suppliers to end destruction of rainforests, peatlands and abuse of human and labor rights. On meat, Tyson may have policies on environmental protection and the treatment of workers, but as we’ve seen, there is a huge gap between Tyson’s paper promises and its harmful practices.

Tyson Foods, in its over 80 years of operation, has had a hugely negative impact on our food system. Tyson Foods profits off the cheap land and cheap labor that grease the wheels of the industrial food complex, specializing in the production of packaged “food” made with conflict palm oil and factory farmed meat. Palm oil is an ingredient in at least 36 Tyson products.

Tyson Foods and its global subsidiaries are one of the world's largest producers of chicken, beef, and pork––entirely raised and processed in industrial operations. It's also well known for its popular “prepared foods” like Sara Lee baked apple pies which contain conflict palm oil. As the parent company of numerous sub-brands, including "Snack Food 20" laggard Hillshire Brands, it markets leading brands such as Tyson, Jimmy Dean, Hillshire Farm, Sara Lee, Ball Park, Wright, Aidells and State Fair.

Here are 12 reasons why we should all be extremely concerned about Tyson Foods.

1. Industrial food production.

A very small number of corporations control the vast majority of the world's food trade: four companies produce more than 58 percent of the world's seeds; four global firms account for 97 percent of poultry genetics research and development; and yet another four produce more than 60 percent of the agrochemicals farmers use.

Chickens raised in factory farms live in filthy, overcrowded conditions as seen by the battery cages above. 8.5 billion chickens are killed each year in the US alone and processed in factory farms. (Photo credit: Wikipedia commons)

2. Corporate consolidation.

Unchecked corporate consolidation has driven out much of the diversity in the marketplace and food system, creating powerful agribusiness giants who control much of what ends up on our plate. Big Ag controls over 83 percent of all foods in the U.S. marketplace, dictating much of what is available in the market. Tyson’s buyout of Snack Food 20 laggard Hillshire Brands marks one of the biggest mergers in the packaged food industry and establishes Tyson firmly in the top two companies by sales in the global processed meat market.

Unchecked corporate consolidation has driven out much of the diversity in the marketplace and food system (Photo credit: Lyza / Flickr)

3. Labor rights abuses for conflict palm oil.

The palm oil industry is rife with forced and child labor. Because Tyson Foods lacks an adequate palm oil procurement policy, it is at extreme risk of sourcing palm oil from companies that are violating the rights of workers. Tyson Foods does not disclose its suppliers, but could have ties to IOI Group, FELDA, or Kuala Lumpur Kepong (KLK)––companies that have been exposed for their exploitative labor practices.

Recent reports have exposed labor exploitation on plantations owned by palm oil giant Indofood, which is a current member of the RSPO and continues to be certified as “sustainable.” This case and others show that Tyson Foods can not rely on this flawed certification system to ensure that it is not connected to companies that are cheating workers out of fair pay and benefits, threatening workers’ health with toxic chemicals, or compelling workers to hire children and bring their spouses to work through an unjust wage system.

The meat and poultry industry has one of the highest rates of injury and illness of any industry according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, and the U.S. Department of Labor calculates that poultry workers are injured five times more than other workers. Despite increasing production line speeds, Tyson’s poultry workers are routinely denied bathroom breaks, and resort to wearing diapers.

The company fails to provide adequate medical care to injured workers, under reports incidents of injury and illness, and denies responsibility for workers who become injured or disabled. The company is routinely fined by the federal government for refusing to pay overtime wages.

Poultry workers suffer amputations at three times the rate for all workers—higher than even high-risk occupations like mining. Latina guest worker employee on rapidly moving chicken processing line, Montgomery, Alabama. (Photo credit:EarlDotter.com)

5. Displacing family farmers for conflict palm oil.

Tyson Foods lacks a palm oil policy strong enough to ensure it does not source conflict palm oil. It is estimated that 2.5 million Dayak Indigenous people in Borneo alone have been displaced to make way for industrial commodity production, namely for conflict palm oil plantations, which produce palm oil that then may be used in products like Sara Lee baked pies.

In Indonesia, more than 700 land conflicts are related to the palm oil industry.

Monocrop palm oil plantations cover more than 27 million hectares of the Earth’s surface. Lush rainforests are destroyed and replaced by biological deserts void of biodiversity. (Photo credit: Nanang Sujana)

6. Displacing family farmers for industrial meat.

In 1950, 95 percent of broiler chicken farms were independent in the U.S. Just five years later, independent farms only accounted for 10 percent of the industry, with most growers selling their goods under contract with a company.

Today, 97 percent of chickens are produced on contract farms, in a system completely rigged in favor of large corporate processors. With less than 2 million family farms surviving in the U.S. today, the once-thriving more than 6 million family farms have been decimated by powerful corporations such as Tyson Foods.

The little red barn on Tyson’s Hillshire Farm label is misleading: not a single one of its farm animals is raised on pasture. Tyson Foods is driving the explosion of factory farming around the world. (Photo credit: Frances Gunn)

7. Antibiotic resistance.

Seventy to 80 percent of all antibiotics in the U.S. are used in the industrial production of animals for food. These lifesaving drugs are routinely fed to animals that are not sick in order to speed up growth and prevent diseases that easily spread in crowded, filthy factory farms.

Public health agencies have declared antibiotic resistance a top health threat in the U.S., and the rampant misuse of antibiotics in animal agriculture is the main culprit. Even though Tyson enacted a policy that has it phasing out antibiotics for poultry in 2017, it has no such commitments for its beef and pork operations.

Given that Tyson has the biggest U.S. market share in poultry and beef (21 percent and 24 percent, respectively) and the third largest in pork (17 percent), Tyson must do better.

70-80% of all antibiotics in the U.S. are used in the industrial production of animals for food. (Photo credit: Melkkarussell plant by Gunnar Richter)

8. Animal rights abuses for conflict palm oil.

As with the previous points, there are many layers of abuse to uncover. Conflict palm oil in Hillshire products is driving extinction: expansion of conflict palm oil is one of the greatest threats to the survival of many critically endangered species in Indonesia and Malaysia such as elephants, rhinos and orangutans.

Animal rights abuses for industrial meat: In Tyson Foods’ own facilities, undercover investigations have documented blatant abuse of animals. In a recent investigation, a Tyson supervisor at a chicken factory is documented standing on birds’ heads to kill them, telling other workers to do the same. The footage documents workers punching and kicking birds, running them over with forklifts, swinging them around by their wings and violently slamming them into cages.

These chickens never see sunlight or breath fresh air, and often suffer from crippling leg deformities. Before making it to the dinner plate, many chickens die slow, painful deaths from a number of diseases directly resulting from the filthy, overcrowded conditions of Tyson’s factory farms.

Captured with a hidden camera in a recent investigation, a Tyson supervisor at a chicken factory stands on live chicken’s head to kill it, telling other workers to do the same. (Photo credit: Mercy for Animals)

9. Conflict palm oil in factory farms.

While palm oil is largely used in food and household products, another product from the oil palm tree called palm kernel meal is often used as feed in commercial meat operations. Palm kernel meal is a commodity known for its cheap price and high cost to the environment, and feeding it to animals in factory farms is a double whammy for the climate.

What’s more, corn and soy, in addition to palm kernel meal, are all common ingredients in animal feed, and are unhealthy for both the livestock forced to eat them and the planet. Although Tyson Foods has a position statement on palm oil, Tyson Foods does not have a policy in regards to its feed, and stands at risk of destroying the world’s forests for its animal feed.

Palm kernel meal is a commodity known for its cheap price and high cost to the environment, and feeding it to animals in factory farms is a double whammy for the climate. (Photo credit: Agricultural Research Service, the research agency of the United States Department of Agriculture)

10. Deforestation risk.

The livestock sector is a major driver of tropical deforestation globally. Raising livestock and growing feed crops is the biggest driver of tropical deforestation in South America. In Brazil for instance, 75 percent of deforestation has been linked to the cattle industry.

Much of the rest is coming from the conversion of forests for soy production, which is then used in farm animal feed. Given that Tyson operates major beef production facilities in China and that Brazil is a major soy exporter to the country (more than 50 percent of the soy produced by Brazil is exported to China), there is a huge risk that Tyson is using soy in animal feed that is linked to deforestation.

Tyson, a company that supplies to the likes of McDonald’s, Popeyes, and KFC (Yum Brands!), should have a policy to address these risks for its global operations.

A soya plantation in Mato Grosso, Brazil. The conversion of forests for soy production, which is then used in livestock feed, is one of the reasons that the livestock sector is a leading driver of global deforestation and the #1 driver in South America. (Photo credit: Lou Dematteis)

11. Water pollution and usage.

In the U.S., Tyson pollutes more water than Cargill (the world’s largest privately owned company) and ExxonMobil (the world's largest publicly traded international oil and gas company) put together. Tyson's pollution has been the subject of several legal challenges over the years, with the company paying more than $25 million in legal settlements and fines since 2001.

Most recently, the Attorney General of Missouri filed a lawsuit against Tyson Foods accusing the company of illegally discharging untreated wastewater that led to the death of up to 100,000 fish. Tyson settled with the state of Missouri in 2015 and agreed to pay $162,898 for natural resource damage, $110,000 in civil penalties, and reimbursed the Missouri Department of Conservation more than $36,000.

In the U.S., Tyson pollutes more water than Cargill (the world’s largest privately owned company) and ExxonMobil (the world's largest publicly traded international oil and gas company) put together. Earlier this year Waterkeeper Alliance and Environmental Working Group (EWG) released a map revealing the (many hidden) locations of more than 6,500 cattle, pig and chicken CAFOs (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations), across the state of North Carolina Environmental Working Group (EWG). (Photo credit: Waterkeeper Alliance.)

12. Climate emissions.

The global food system is responsible for roughly 30 percent of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions––a major contributor for an increasingly unstable climate. These GHG emissions are produced largely by converting land for agricultural use, particularly from converting forest into farmland for industrial palm oil plantations or the production of feed crops, like soy and corn. Within the agricultural industry at large, the livestock sector is a major contributor to the emission of greenhouse gases, representing 14.5 percent of human-induced GHG emissions.

In addition to that, tropical deforestation and forest degradation are responsible for around 15 percent of global GHG emissions; commercial agriculture, largely for export markets, is the primary driver of tropical deforestation. As a major company in the global food system, Tyson’s industrial cattle, chicken and pig operations, as well as the palm oil-laden products it markets, are taking a major toll on the climate.

Palm oil companies illegally burn forests to prepare land for plantations, emitting a thick haze of smoke that shuts down regional air traffic and provokes public health alerts in urban areas hundreds of miles away. Indonesia is the world’s third largest emitter of greenhouse gasses after the U.S. and China, with 85 percent of its emissions profile coming from rainforest and peatland degradation. (Photo credit: Paul Hilton)

Take action

As a matter of urgency, parent company Tyson Foods and the companies it owns like Hillshire Brands Company, must adopt a responsible food policy with commitments on responsible production of two controversial commodities rampant in its supply chain––palm oil and meat.

Tyson Foods is a laggard company with a weak palm oil commitment that relies solely on the inadequate Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) certification system and lacks requirements for suppliers to end destruction of rainforests, peatlands and abuse of human and labor rights. On meat, Tyson may have policies on environmental protection and the treatment of workers, but as we’ve seen, there is a huge gap between Tyson’s paper promises and its harmful practices.

]]>
http://www.alternet.org/environment/watch-how-two-tribal-women-are-fighting-protect-arctic-oil-drillingWatch: How Two Tribal Women Are Fighting to Protect the Arctic From Oil Drillinghttp://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/238744960/0/alternet_activism~Watch-How-Two-Tribal-Women-Are-Fighting-to-Protect-the-Arctic-From-Oil-Drilling

A new short film tells the story of a battle to save an ancestral homeland.

The Gwich'in people of Alaska and Northern Canada have fought for three decades to protect the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge from oil drilling and other threats. The outdoor apparel company Patagonia and non-profit conservation group Alaska Wilderness League have recently released The Refuge, a 15-minute film telling the story of two Gwich'in women who are fighting for their ancestral home and the survival of the wild animals that bring them life. In conjunction with the film, Patagonia has partnered with Care2, the world’s largest social media site for good, to launch a Care2 petition asking Congress to pledge to protect the Refuge's Coastal Plain as wilderness.

"Patagonia has supported the Gwich'in Steering Committee and Alaska Wilderness League through our Environmental Grants Program since the early 2000s," notes Rose Marcario, Patagonia’s Chief Executive Officer. "We stand in solidarity with the Gwich’in community today to ask Congress to designate the Coastal Plain as wilderness and protect the Gwich’in way of life forever."

To the Gwich'in, the Refuge’s pristine Coastal Plain where caribou calve their young is "the Sacred Place Where Life Begins." The coastal plain, although a true national treasure, lacks protection as wilderness and has become a target for drilling by the oil industry and its allies. It's now under more threat than ever—with pro-oil forces stating they will work quickly to push for drilling in the Refuge. Drilling in this Arctic nursery would likely drive the Porcupine Caribou from their calving grounds, endangering the survival of the herd and the Gwich'in way of life. The Gwich’in have depended on the Porcupine Caribou Herd for millennia. But their connection to the caribou goes far deeper than traditional subsistence hunting: the Gwich’in believe that they are guardians of the herd, and that the fates of their people and the caribou are forever entwined.

For decades the Coastal Plain, known as the Refuge's biological heart, has been in political limbo, at best, and nearly at the tip of a drill bit, at worst. But the Obama administration has given us all hope that the Arctic Refuge will be taken off the table forever. In January 2015, President Obama took an important step to recommend wilderness for the Refuge and its Coastal Plain. The president and his administration have done more than any other in the last two decades to protect the Arctic Refuge. Now, it’s time for Congress to act.

"For us, this is a matter of physical, spiritual and cultural survival," said Gwich’in spokesperson Bernadette Demientieff. "It is our basic human right to continue to feed our families on our ancestral lands and practice our subsistence way of life. We ask that Congress take the next step to protect the Coastal Plain by designating it as wilderness."

A new short film tells the story of a battle to save an ancestral homeland.

The Gwich'in people of Alaska and Northern Canada have fought for three decades to protect the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge from oil drilling and other threats. The outdoor apparel company Patagonia and non-profit conservation group Alaska Wilderness League have recently released The Refuge, a 15-minute film telling the story of two Gwich'in women who are fighting for their ancestral home and the survival of the wild animals that bring them life. In conjunction with the film, Patagonia has partnered with Care2, the world’s largest social media site for good, to launch a Care2 petition asking Congress to pledge to protect the Refuge's Coastal Plain as wilderness.

"Patagonia has supported the Gwich'in Steering Committee and Alaska Wilderness League through our Environmental Grants Program since the early 2000s," notes Rose Marcario, Patagonia’s Chief Executive Officer. "We stand in solidarity with the Gwich’in community today to ask Congress to designate the Coastal Plain as wilderness and protect the Gwich’in way of life forever."

To the Gwich'in, the Refuge’s pristine Coastal Plain where caribou calve their young is "the Sacred Place Where Life Begins." The coastal plain, although a true national treasure, lacks protection as wilderness and has become a target for drilling by the oil industry and its allies. It's now under more threat than ever—with pro-oil forces stating they will work quickly to push for drilling in the Refuge. Drilling in this Arctic nursery would likely drive the Porcupine Caribou from their calving grounds, endangering the survival of the herd and the Gwich'in way of life. The Gwich’in have depended on the Porcupine Caribou Herd for millennia. But their connection to the caribou goes far deeper than traditional subsistence hunting: the Gwich’in believe that they are guardians of the herd, and that the fates of their people and the caribou are forever entwined.

For decades the Coastal Plain, known as the Refuge's biological heart, has been in political limbo, at best, and nearly at the tip of a drill bit, at worst. But the Obama administration has given us all hope that the Arctic Refuge will be taken off the table forever. In January 2015, President Obama took an important step to recommend wilderness for the Refuge and its Coastal Plain. The president and his administration have done more than any other in the last two decades to protect the Arctic Refuge. Now, it’s time for Congress to act.

"For us, this is a matter of physical, spiritual and cultural survival," said Gwich’in spokesperson Bernadette Demientieff. "It is our basic human right to continue to feed our families on our ancestral lands and practice our subsistence way of life. We ask that Congress take the next step to protect the Coastal Plain by designating it as wilderness."

What alternative routes for the Dakota Access Pipeline will be considered?

On Sunday, celebrations erupted at Standing Rock after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers announced it had denied the Dakota Access pipeline company a permit to build the final segment of the $3.8 billion project and would study a possible reroute of the pipeline. But what alternative routes will be considered? What will the process of an environmental impact statement look like? Can this decision be reversed once President-elect Donald Trump takes office? And what’s next for the resistance movement? To answer some of those questions, we speak with Tara Houska, national campaigns director for Honor the Earth. She is Ojibwe from Couchiching First Nation.

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: This is Cannupa Hanska Luger.

CANNUPA HANSKA LUGER: I think—I think this sort of opportunity here—the thing that has happened here is that we’ve recognized that we have agency. We have given a lot of our power to other entities, saying, "Please help us. Please save us." But when we come together as living things, as people, well, then, suddenly we recognize that we have—we have power. And that’s what this country was supposed to be built about. That’s what we were supposed to be promised from before. And so, you know, whoever is president, we’re human beings. We’re the people. We’re the reason. We’re the living things here, you know? And hopefully that will move forward and can be shared. I mean, if you look down the road here, there are lights as far as the eye can see. People have come to this place to recognize that we have agency, you know, we have power. And when we come together, we recognize it’s easier to share—

UNIDENTIFIED: Mni wiconi!

CANNUPA HANSKA LUGER: It’s easier to share than it is to take away, you know? Sharing is so much easier. I just got a kiss from that guy. This is easy. I just stood here.

AMY GOODMAN: But what alternate routes would be considered? What will the process of an environmental impact statement look like? Can this decision be reversed once President-elect Donald Trump takes office? And what’s next for the resistance movement? To answer some of these questions, we’re joined by Tara Houska, national campaigns director for Honor the Earth. She’s Ojibwe from Couchiching First Nation. We saw her both times we were in North Dakota, and she joined us on our show. Tara, welcome back to Democracy Now! First, where were you when the news came down yesterday? And what’s your response?

TARA HOUSKA: I was actually—I got a call from [inaudible] that this call with the White House had taken place. And I immediately got into my vehicle and went out to camp. I happened to be in service. I was actually driving down Highway 6, instead of 1806, which remains blockaded. Yeah, I mean, it’s an incredible, incredible moment of grassroots organizing reaching the highest levels of government and effectuating change. We saw that with the entire, like, review of this permitting process. That was a huge win. But specific to this project, now we’re seeing this, you know, decision not to grant an easement under Lake Oahe and to look into an environmental impact statement, which is what the tribe has asked for all along.

AMY GOODMAN: Now, the—Energy Transfer Partners says they’re moving ahead, they actually don’t need this permit to build. What’s your response to them? And are you concerned—though the chairman says there’s no way they can build right now—that they will move forward?

TARA HOUSKA: You know, it’s really not surprising to hear Energy Transfer Partners say those things, seeing as they openly stated in federal court—Dakota Access’s attorney stated that the permit was a formality, and the judge said, you know, "Well, it’s clearly not of formality now, is it?" So they kind of have this very arrogant attitude of what they believe to be a rubber-stamping process to their incredibly destructive project. You know, if Energy Transfer Partners is planning to proceed without a permit and be in total flagrant violation of the law, then I would want to know, you know, what’s the administration’s response to protecting—protecting the lands, you know, protecting the public interest. That’s what an environmental impact statement is about. If someone is violating the law, they’re tasked with enforcing it. So, I wonder if federal marshals are going to be sent out or how the Army Corps intends to address a violator of that nature.

AMY GOODMAN: So what about this rerouting idea, the rerouting of the pipeline, and the environmental impact statement process?

TARA HOUSKA: Yeah, you know, one part of this process that’s been very difficult for me is I actually worked at the White House Council on Environmental Quality as an intern, which is tasked with NEPA, administrating NEPA. So, an EIS considers, you know, different—it will consider alternate routes, it’ll consider a no-build option—all of these different things that should have been done in the first place for a 1,200—almost 1,200 mile pipeline. So, you know, I’m really hopeful that this impact statement is done, it’s done very effectively, and it’s done very all-encompassing, which is what they’re supposed to do, you know, cumulative impacts considered. It sounds like they’re just going to use—do an impact statement on just that one little piece and that one little crossing, instead of doing a cumulative impact statement. And that’s very unfortunate that they continue to use Nationwide Permit 12. But I hope it opens the door to more litigation, to, you know, taking that part out of the process.

AMY GOODMAN: What happens with a Donald Trump administration when he becomes president, who has said he supports the pipeline? Can he just reverse all of this? TARA HOUSKA: Yeah, you know, that’s a—that’s a reality of—you know, this victory is, I think, a momentous occasion of feeling the power of the people, but at the same time we are very aware that the next president coming in is in support of Dakota Access and will probably, you know, just cancel whatever environmental impact statement is in progress and attempt to push this pipeline through. And that’s where I think, you know, it’s really incumbent upon us to remain vigilant, to recognize the power that’s within us of organizing and coming together. You know, this wasn’t just indigenous people; this was people from all nations that came together in support of the water, in support of future generations, because this is an issue that affects us all. So—

AMY GOODMAN: Does the Energy Transfer Partners lose something by not building by January 1st?

TARA HOUSKA: They do. You know, as this—they recently just brought a suit in court saying that, you know, so far we’ve cost them $100 million, that the demonstrations against their project has cost them dearly. And, you know, it’s a reality that this will eventually become a stranded asset. So, you know, if they can’t reach their January 1st build deadlines and are forced to push this project back, I hope that many of their funding partners, which we have, you know, looked at and we know—there’s a full list of them, and people have gone and done direct action, nonviolent direct action, at those places—don’t support a project that impacts negatively so many people. There’s 17 million people that live along the Missouri River. This is indigenous lands. This is sacred sites being destroyed. No investor should want to be part of a project like that. Move to renewable energy.

AMY GOODMAN: Finally, what are you saying about the resistance camps? There are thousands of people who are there. The chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, Dave Archambault, says now you can go home and enjoy your winters at home, because this pipeline, at this point, cannot move forward. Do you feel the same way?

TARA HOUSKA: You know, I feel like I think it’s—you know, the response of the administration, from President Obama, was due to a lot of pressure. You know, they put out this Army Corps letter saying that they were going to treat indigenous people as trespassers on treaty lands. More people came. They said they were going to subject us to local law enforcement. More people came. The veterans all showed up, you know, thousands and thousands of people, to effectuate this change. And so, knowing that the Trump administration is coming in, this fight is not over. And so, you know, I think maybe people might need a break. Some folks probably need to go home and like, you know, regroup, after such violations have happened, you know, really violent altercations on behalf of the police. And, you know, I think that we need to remain vigilant at the same time and know that this could happen in just a few short months.

AMY GOODMAN: Tara Houska, I want to thank you for being with us, national campaigns director for Honor the Earth. She’s Ojibwe from Couchiching First Nation, has been living in North Dakota now for many months. You’re not actually at the resistance camp now; you’re in Mandan at the Honor the Earth jail support house. Very quickly, in 20 seconds, are there anyone—is there anyone else in jail now who was arrested for protesting the Dakota Access pipeline, the jail being in Mandan, where you are?

TARA HOUSKA: Red Fawn remains in incarceration. She was the woman that was originally charged with attempted murder. The prosecutor had to drop that charge, and now they’re charging her with felony possession of a weapon. So, her case remains ongoing. But there have been over 500 charges brought, so we have a long road in front of us to actually defend these folks.

What alternative routes for the Dakota Access Pipeline will be considered?

On Sunday, celebrations erupted at Standing Rock after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers announced it had denied the Dakota Access pipeline company a permit to build the final segment of the $3.8 billion project and would study a possible reroute of the pipeline. But what alternative routes will be considered? What will the process of an environmental impact statement look like? Can this decision be reversed once President-elect Donald Trump takes office? And what’s next for the resistance movement? To answer some of those questions, we speak with Tara Houska, national campaigns director for Honor the Earth. She is Ojibwe from Couchiching First Nation.

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: This is Cannupa Hanska Luger.

CANNUPA HANSKA LUGER: I think—I think this sort of opportunity here—the thing that has happened here is that we’ve recognized that we have agency. We have given a lot of our power to other entities, saying, "Please help us. Please save us." But when we come together as living things, as people, well, then, suddenly we recognize that we have—we have power. And that’s what this country was supposed to be built about. That’s what we were supposed to be promised from before. And so, you know, whoever is president, we’re human beings. We’re the people. We’re the reason. We’re the living things here, you know? And hopefully that will move forward and can be shared. I mean, if you look down the road here, there are lights as far as the eye can see. People have come to this place to recognize that we have agency, you know, we have power. And when we come together, we recognize it’s easier to share—

UNIDENTIFIED: Mni wiconi!

CANNUPA HANSKA LUGER: It’s easier to share than it is to take away, you know? Sharing is so much easier. I just got a kiss from that guy. This is easy. I just stood here.

AMY GOODMAN: But what alternate routes would be considered? What will the process of an environmental impact statement look like? Can this decision be reversed once President-elect Donald Trump takes office? And what’s next for the resistance movement? To answer some of these questions, we’re joined by Tara Houska, national campaigns director for Honor the Earth. She’s Ojibwe from Couchiching First Nation. We saw her both times we were in North Dakota, and she joined us on our show. Tara, welcome back to Democracy Now! First, where were you when the news came down yesterday? And what’s your response?

TARA HOUSKA: I was actually—I got a call from [inaudible] that this call with the White House had taken place. And I immediately got into my vehicle and went out to camp. I happened to be in service. I was actually driving down Highway 6, instead of 1806, which remains blockaded. Yeah, I mean, it’s an incredible, incredible moment of grassroots organizing reaching the highest levels of government and effectuating change. We saw that with the entire, like, review of this permitting process. That was a huge win. But specific to this project, now we’re seeing this, you know, decision not to grant an easement under Lake Oahe and to look into an environmental impact statement, which is what the tribe has asked for all along.

AMY GOODMAN: Now, the—Energy Transfer Partners says they’re moving ahead, they actually don’t need this permit to build. What’s your response to them? And are you concerned—though the chairman says there’s no way they can build right now—that they will move forward?

TARA HOUSKA: You know, it’s really not surprising to hear Energy Transfer Partners say those things, seeing as they openly stated in federal court—Dakota Access’s attorney stated that the permit was a formality, and the judge said, you know, "Well, it’s clearly not of formality now, is it?" So they kind of have this very arrogant attitude of what they believe to be a rubber-stamping process to their incredibly destructive project. You know, if Energy Transfer Partners is planning to proceed without a permit and be in total flagrant violation of the law, then I would want to know, you know, what’s the administration’s response to protecting—protecting the lands, you know, protecting the public interest. That’s what an environmental impact statement is about. If someone is violating the law, they’re tasked with enforcing it. So, I wonder if federal marshals are going to be sent out or how the Army Corps intends to address a violator of that nature.

AMY GOODMAN: So what about this rerouting idea, the rerouting of the pipeline, and the environmental impact statement process?

TARA HOUSKA: Yeah, you know, one part of this process that’s been very difficult for me is I actually worked at the White House Council on Environmental Quality as an intern, which is tasked with NEPA, administrating NEPA. So, an EIS considers, you know, different—it will consider alternate routes, it’ll consider a no-build option—all of these different things that should have been done in the first place for a 1,200—almost 1,200 mile pipeline. So, you know, I’m really hopeful that this impact statement is done, it’s done very effectively, and it’s done very all-encompassing, which is what they’re supposed to do, you know, cumulative impacts considered. It sounds like they’re just going to use—do an impact statement on just that one little piece and that one little crossing, instead of doing a cumulative impact statement. And that’s very unfortunate that they continue to use Nationwide Permit 12. But I hope it opens the door to more litigation, to, you know, taking that part out of the process.

AMY GOODMAN: What happens with a Donald Trump administration when he becomes president, who has said he supports the pipeline? Can he just reverse all of this? TARA HOUSKA: Yeah, you know, that’s a—that’s a reality of—you know, this victory is, I think, a momentous occasion of feeling the power of the people, but at the same time we are very aware that the next president coming in is in support of Dakota Access and will probably, you know, just cancel whatever environmental impact statement is in progress and attempt to push this pipeline through. And that’s where I think, you know, it’s really incumbent upon us to remain vigilant, to recognize the power that’s within us of organizing and coming together. You know, this wasn’t just indigenous people; this was people from all nations that came together in support of the water, in support of future generations, because this is an issue that affects us all. So—

AMY GOODMAN: Does the Energy Transfer Partners lose something by not building by January 1st?

TARA HOUSKA: They do. You know, as this—they recently just brought a suit in court saying that, you know, so far we’ve cost them $100 million, that the demonstrations against their project has cost them dearly. And, you know, it’s a reality that this will eventually become a stranded asset. So, you know, if they can’t reach their January 1st build deadlines and are forced to push this project back, I hope that many of their funding partners, which we have, you know, looked at and we know—there’s a full list of them, and people have gone and done direct action, nonviolent direct action, at those places—don’t support a project that impacts negatively so many people. There’s 17 million people that live along the Missouri River. This is indigenous lands. This is sacred sites being destroyed. No investor should want to be part of a project like that. Move to renewable energy.

AMY GOODMAN: Finally, what are you saying about the resistance camps? There are thousands of people who are there. The chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, Dave Archambault, says now you can go home and enjoy your winters at home, because this pipeline, at this point, cannot move forward. Do you feel the same way?

TARA HOUSKA: You know, I feel like I think it’s—you know, the response of the administration, from President Obama, was due to a lot of pressure. You know, they put out this Army Corps letter saying that they were going to treat indigenous people as trespassers on treaty lands. More people came. They said they were going to subject us to local law enforcement. More people came. The veterans all showed up, you know, thousands and thousands of people, to effectuate this change. And so, knowing that the Trump administration is coming in, this fight is not over. And so, you know, I think maybe people might need a break. Some folks probably need to go home and like, you know, regroup, after such violations have happened, you know, really violent altercations on behalf of the police. And, you know, I think that we need to remain vigilant at the same time and know that this could happen in just a few short months.

AMY GOODMAN: Tara Houska, I want to thank you for being with us, national campaigns director for Honor the Earth. She’s Ojibwe from Couchiching First Nation, has been living in North Dakota now for many months. You’re not actually at the resistance camp now; you’re in Mandan at the Honor the Earth jail support house. Very quickly, in 20 seconds, are there anyone—is there anyone else in jail now who was arrested for protesting the Dakota Access pipeline, the jail being in Mandan, where you are?

TARA HOUSKA: Red Fawn remains in incarceration. She was the woman that was originally charged with attempted murder. The prosecutor had to drop that charge, and now they’re charging her with felony possession of a weapon. So, her case remains ongoing. But there have been over 500 charges brought, so we have a long road in front of us to actually defend these folks.

The U.S. Army Corps officially halted construction on the Dakota Access pipeline on December 4.

In an historic win for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in North Dakota and the environment, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers denied Energy Transfer Partners, the company behind the pipeline, a permit to drill underneath Lake Oahe on the Missouri River—officially halting construction on the Dakota Access pipeline. The project has faced months of resistance from the Standing Rock Sioux in North Dakota, members of more than 200 indigenous nations from across the Americas and thousands of their non-Native allies—all concerned the pipeline’s construction will destroy sacred Sioux sites and that a pipeline leak could contaminate the Missouri River, which serves as a water supply for millions. We get reaction from Standing Rock Sioux Chairman Dave Archambault II.

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: In North Dakota, water protectors resisting the $3.8 billion Dakota Access pipeline have won an historic victory. On Sunday, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers denied Energy Transfer Partners, the company behind the pipeline, a permit to drill underneath Lake Oahe on the Missouri River—officially halting construction. The pipeline is slated to carry crude oil from the Bakken oilfields of North Dakota through South Dakota, Iowa and into Illinois, where it’s slated to link up with another pipeline to carry the oil down to refineries in the Gulf. The project has faced months of resistance from the Standing Rock Sioux in North Dakota, members of more than 200 indigenous nations from across the Americas and thousands of their non-Native allies—all concerned the pipeline’s construction will destroy sacred Sioux sites and that a pipeline leak could contaminate the Missouri River, which serves as a water supply for millions. The growing resistance movement is the largest gathering of Native Americans in decades. In a statement issued Sunday, Jo-Ellen Darcy, the Army’s assistant secretary for civil works, said, quote, "Although we have had continuing discussion and exchanges of new information with the Standing Rock Sioux and Dakota Access, it’s clear that there’s more work to do. The best way to complete that work responsibly and expeditiously is to explore alternate routes for the pipeline," unquote. Darcy also indicated the government will undertake an environmental impact statement for this section of the pipeline, a lengthy process that takes months, if not years. The Army’s announcement Sunday came as thousands of Native and non-Native military veterans gathered at Standing Rock, ready to form a human shield around the water protectors, who have faced an increasingly violent police crackdown that’s cost the state of North Dakota more than $10 million. In response to the Army’s announcement, Energy Transfer Partners and Sunoco Logistics, which is slated to operate the pipeline if it’s built, issued a joint statement accusing the White House of taking a purely political action, and saying the companies are, quote, "fully committed to ensuring that this vital project is brought to completion and fully expect to complete construction of the pipeline without any additional rerouting in and around Lake Oahe," unquote. Well, for more, we go directly to Standing Rock, where we’re joined by Standing Rock Sioux Chairman Dave Archambault. Chairman, welcome back to Democracy Now! First, respond to the latest news, the action of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: Yeah, I think it’s something that’s historic, like you had said, and it’s something that it takes a lot of courage for decision makers to come up and make the right decision, to make the right choice in this matter. And we’ve been talking about this with the Corps of Engineers for almost two years now, and we’ve been letting them know that we had problems with this pipeline, because it not only threatens our water, it threatens our heritage, it threatens our culture, it threatens our environment. We, as a people, have a right to stand up for this. And so, we expressed those feelings from the very beginning. We expressed those feelings with the company. We expressed those feelings with the senators of the state, the congressmen of the state. You know, everybody knew that Standing Rock was opposed to this pipeline because of the threats that it has on our people. And we had a lot of support. So when this decision came down by the Corps of Engineers, it feels like, finally, for the first time in history, over centuries, somebody is listening to us. And in order to listen to us, they have to make the right decision. And it takes a lot of courage to do that when you’re up against an oil company who tries to dictate to the federal government what has to be done and when it has to be done and where it has to be done.

AMY GOODMAN: Were you surprised?

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: Yes, I was—I was very surprised. Something like this has never rolled in our favor ever. And so, I’m just thankful for all the people who gave support, all the people who contributed in one way or another and believed in this and stayed with the peaceful protest all along. And I think that was what helped us over the edge, is—so, we maintained our position. We were peaceful and prayerful, and we tried to do the best that we can to build awareness for everyone. And I want to thank you, Amy, for all the work that you have done, as well, to build awareness.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, Chairman, the Army Corps of Engineers has denied the permit to build the pipeline under the Missouri, which it needs, but Energy Transfer Partners says now it doesn’t need this and that they are moving full steam ahead, they’re going to continue building. Is this possible?

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: No, it’s not possible. And if they continue to press the government, they’re going to shut the whole program down. They’re going to shut the whole project down, and there will be no pipeline. So, that’s not possible. And they—the company knows that they need the easement in order to move forward. And so, this is just another example of corporate world forcing its hand on a people and on the government. And this has to stop. They have to realize that the laws are there, and if they can start to break laws to force their hand on everybody, they’re putting their investors at risk, and nothing will happen.

AMY GOODMAN: The Army’s assistant secretary for civil works, Jo-Ellen Darcy, said in a statement, "The best way to complete that work responsibly and expeditiously is to explore alternate routes for the pipeline’s crossing." What would that mean, Chairman?

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: I would say just let it—get it off of our treaty lands. You know, we know, within our treaty boundaries, what sites are sacred and what is meaningful, what places are sacred to us. And if they just reroute it and—I had a discussion with the CEO, Kelcy Warren, and he felt that if I had—if we had the discussion early on, this wouldn’t be the final route. But because they put the investors’ money at risk by continuing to build without a permit, he has nowhere else to go, so he’s going to try to force this project through at this site. But sometime we’re going to have to put people before money.

AMY GOODMAN: Do you now expect the government to undertake a full environmental impact statement? And what would that mean?

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: The difference between an environmental impact statement and an environmental assessment is environmental assessment only looks at the least impactful route for the environment, but with the EIS, environmental impact statement, you take into consideration people. And what we have here is a people, the first people that occupied this nation’s lands. We are—we were always here, before anybody else. And that’s something special. That’s meaningful. And because we are here, we have every right to oppose this pipeline, because we feel that this pipeline will threaten not only our water, but our heritage, our culture, our environment. And we have to say, "Don’t do that to us anymore. You did it to us all too long, for 200 years, and for the interests of energy independence, economic development, national security, we paid for that. We continue to pay for it. So, today, we are asking you to stop, don’t do that anymore." And somebody is listening, finally.

AMY GOODMAN: Last week, President-elect Donald Trump expressed his support for the completion of the Dakota Access pipeline. In a communications briefing, Trump’s transition team said his support for the pipeline, quote, "has nothing to do with his personal investments," unquote. As of 2015, Trump had between $500,000 and a million dollars invested in the pipeline company, Energy Transfer Partners—although the Trump spokesperson, Hope Hicks, recently claimed Trump has sold off his shares in the company—also invested in Phillips 66, which would be involved with the pipeline if it’s built. What about this? And what does this transition of power mean for the pipeline? Could this just be reversed when Donald Trump becomes president?

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: You know, I see it as an opportunity for indigenous peoples, for tribes, to start a relationship with the president-elect and help him understand what is important to the first occupants of this nation and what we have paid for. His wealth is built off of our backs, and he doesn’t realize that, so we have to help him understand—and this is a huge opportunity for us—and help him understand that this decision that was made by the Corps of Engineers is the right decision. And you have to, at one time, put money aside and say, "What is it that the people want? What is it that we can do to make lives better for this country? Let’s look at the years that are yet to come, the 50 years ahead, and find out what we can do to make sure that there still is life here." And so, we have a huge opportunity in front of us to help president-elect understand our issues. And I look forward to a conversation, and just like I had with Kelcy Warren. You know, it’s—I have nothing personal against the president, nothing personal against Kelcy Warren. I have nothing personal against the senators and the congressmen of this state of North Dakota or the government. They have to realize that we are here, and we’ve always been here, and we’re not going anywhere. And there are some things that are just precious and important to us, and everybody has to understand that. And we’re not opposed to pipeline construction. We’re not opposed to economic development, energy independence. Just don’t continue to do it and expect us to pay for it. So, when this pipeline breaks, who’s going to pay for it? We will be the first ones to pay for it. And we’ve been paying for this nation’s wealth, safety and security from day one.

AMY GOODMAN: Chairman Archambault, what happens now at the resistance camps? They have swelled to thousands. You have the Dakota Access pipeline saying they’re moving ahead. What’s next?

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: The pipeline is not going to move ahead. The campers that are there can now enjoy the winter with their families at home. It is—the winters are going to get harsh here. And it’s time. You know, they had a purpose, and that purpose is served. That was to help us build awareness and show the support and stand with us. And so, today, it’s a beautiful day. And every day is a good day. And they have to realize that, that we’re no longer needing the purpose that they set out to do, so—and it’s OK. The company will not build beyond the easement that isn’t given to them. So, they can go home.

AMY GOODMAN: Chairman Archambault, you’re among the hundreds of people who have been arrested since the resistance grew. What happens now with the sheriff, with the police actions, that have become increasingly violent, from the water cannons to the sound cannons to the military equipment? Ten million dollars, we understand, has been spent, at least, on police activities.

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: Yeah. What we have to do is we have to try to rebuild relationships that were harmed. You have to understand that I live here in this community. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is not going anywhere, when this all disperses, the water protectors leave, the Energy Transfer Partners, Dakota Access pipelines leave, and we’re left with the residual effects. So it’s important for us to try to continue to establish relationships with the state and with the surrounding communities. And that includes Morton County and the Sheriff’s Department. Now, I do believe that there was an opportunity for the sheriff to better handle this situation, and there was a better—there was an opportunity for this governor of the state to better handle the situation. But the path they chose harmed relationships. So we have to try to re-establish and rebuild those relationships.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, Chairman Archambault, I want to thank you very much for joining us, joining us from the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. We thank you for this update. And, of course, we’ll continue to follow what takes place here. What do you say to those who say they’re not moving, they don’t have faith that the pipeline won’t go forward, they’re staying at the camps?

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: They have to pray. They have to continue to pray. And they have to start taking the lessons that were given at this camp. What did we learn at this camp? That prayer and peace is what’s going to help us be successful. It’s not the violent acts by people that build awareness. It’s the moral high ground that everybody needs to take. And if they want to stay, it’s going to be at their own risk. And there’s really no need for them to stay. They can go home and enjoy this winter, enjoy the holidays, if they celebrate them, with their families. And I’m sure their families are yearning for them. So, it’s OK now. And I understand their mistrust for the government and for this company, because, from the beginning, nothing was held to. You know, we asked the company to voluntarily stop, but they wouldn’t stop. So, I understand how they feel, but it’s OK. And the company did not get the easement, and so that’s going to be a process, a long, drawn-out process. Even if the company tries to reverse this and even if the president tries to reverse it, it’s not going to happen this winter, so it’s OK for them to go home.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you again, Chairman Dave Archambault, chair of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, speaking to us from Standing Rock in North Dakota. This is Democracy Now! When we come back, we’ll speak with one of the many veterans who have come to protect the water protectors. He comes from Arizona, Navajo, his grandfather a Navajo code talker. Stay with us.

The U.S. Army Corps officially halted construction on the Dakota Access pipeline on December 4.

In an historic win for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in North Dakota and the environment, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers denied Energy Transfer Partners, the company behind the pipeline, a permit to drill underneath Lake Oahe on the Missouri River—officially halting construction on the Dakota Access pipeline. The project has faced months of resistance from the Standing Rock Sioux in North Dakota, members of more than 200 indigenous nations from across the Americas and thousands of their non-Native allies—all concerned the pipeline’s construction will destroy sacred Sioux sites and that a pipeline leak could contaminate the Missouri River, which serves as a water supply for millions. We get reaction from Standing Rock Sioux Chairman Dave Archambault II.

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: In North Dakota, water protectors resisting the $3.8 billion Dakota Access pipeline have won an historic victory. On Sunday, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers denied Energy Transfer Partners, the company behind the pipeline, a permit to drill underneath Lake Oahe on the Missouri River—officially halting construction. The pipeline is slated to carry crude oil from the Bakken oilfields of North Dakota through South Dakota, Iowa and into Illinois, where it’s slated to link up with another pipeline to carry the oil down to refineries in the Gulf. The project has faced months of resistance from the Standing Rock Sioux in North Dakota, members of more than 200 indigenous nations from across the Americas and thousands of their non-Native allies—all concerned the pipeline’s construction will destroy sacred Sioux sites and that a pipeline leak could contaminate the Missouri River, which serves as a water supply for millions. The growing resistance movement is the largest gathering of Native Americans in decades. In a statement issued Sunday, Jo-Ellen Darcy, the Army’s assistant secretary for civil works, said, quote, "Although we have had continuing discussion and exchanges of new information with the Standing Rock Sioux and Dakota Access, it’s clear that there’s more work to do. The best way to complete that work responsibly and expeditiously is to explore alternate routes for the pipeline," unquote. Darcy also indicated the government will undertake an environmental impact statement for this section of the pipeline, a lengthy process that takes months, if not years. The Army’s announcement Sunday came as thousands of Native and non-Native military veterans gathered at Standing Rock, ready to form a human shield around the water protectors, who have faced an increasingly violent police crackdown that’s cost the state of North Dakota more than $10 million. In response to the Army’s announcement, Energy Transfer Partners and Sunoco Logistics, which is slated to operate the pipeline if it’s built, issued a joint statement accusing the White House of taking a purely political action, and saying the companies are, quote, "fully committed to ensuring that this vital project is brought to completion and fully expect to complete construction of the pipeline without any additional rerouting in and around Lake Oahe," unquote. Well, for more, we go directly to Standing Rock, where we’re joined by Standing Rock Sioux Chairman Dave Archambault. Chairman, welcome back to Democracy Now! First, respond to the latest news, the action of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: Yeah, I think it’s something that’s historic, like you had said, and it’s something that it takes a lot of courage for decision makers to come up and make the right decision, to make the right choice in this matter. And we’ve been talking about this with the Corps of Engineers for almost two years now, and we’ve been letting them know that we had problems with this pipeline, because it not only threatens our water, it threatens our heritage, it threatens our culture, it threatens our environment. We, as a people, have a right to stand up for this. And so, we expressed those feelings from the very beginning. We expressed those feelings with the company. We expressed those feelings with the senators of the state, the congressmen of the state. You know, everybody knew that Standing Rock was opposed to this pipeline because of the threats that it has on our people. And we had a lot of support. So when this decision came down by the Corps of Engineers, it feels like, finally, for the first time in history, over centuries, somebody is listening to us. And in order to listen to us, they have to make the right decision. And it takes a lot of courage to do that when you’re up against an oil company who tries to dictate to the federal government what has to be done and when it has to be done and where it has to be done.

AMY GOODMAN: Were you surprised?

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: Yes, I was—I was very surprised. Something like this has never rolled in our favor ever. And so, I’m just thankful for all the people who gave support, all the people who contributed in one way or another and believed in this and stayed with the peaceful protest all along. And I think that was what helped us over the edge, is—so, we maintained our position. We were peaceful and prayerful, and we tried to do the best that we can to build awareness for everyone. And I want to thank you, Amy, for all the work that you have done, as well, to build awareness.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, Chairman, the Army Corps of Engineers has denied the permit to build the pipeline under the Missouri, which it needs, but Energy Transfer Partners says now it doesn’t need this and that they are moving full steam ahead, they’re going to continue building. Is this possible?

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: No, it’s not possible. And if they continue to press the government, they’re going to shut the whole program down. They’re going to shut the whole project down, and there will be no pipeline. So, that’s not possible. And they—the company knows that they need the easement in order to move forward. And so, this is just another example of corporate world forcing its hand on a people and on the government. And this has to stop. They have to realize that the laws are there, and if they can start to break laws to force their hand on everybody, they’re putting their investors at risk, and nothing will happen.

AMY GOODMAN: The Army’s assistant secretary for civil works, Jo-Ellen Darcy, said in a statement, "The best way to complete that work responsibly and expeditiously is to explore alternate routes for the pipeline’s crossing." What would that mean, Chairman?

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: I would say just let it—get it off of our treaty lands. You know, we know, within our treaty boundaries, what sites are sacred and what is meaningful, what places are sacred to us. And if they just reroute it and—I had a discussion with the CEO, Kelcy Warren, and he felt that if I had—if we had the discussion early on, this wouldn’t be the final route. But because they put the investors’ money at risk by continuing to build without a permit, he has nowhere else to go, so he’s going to try to force this project through at this site. But sometime we’re going to have to put people before money.

AMY GOODMAN: Do you now expect the government to undertake a full environmental impact statement? And what would that mean?

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: The difference between an environmental impact statement and an environmental assessment is environmental assessment only looks at the least impactful route for the environment, but with the EIS, environmental impact statement, you take into consideration people. And what we have here is a people, the first people that occupied this nation’s lands. We are—we were always here, before anybody else. And that’s something special. That’s meaningful. And because we are here, we have every right to oppose this pipeline, because we feel that this pipeline will threaten not only our water, but our heritage, our culture, our environment. And we have to say, "Don’t do that to us anymore. You did it to us all too long, for 200 years, and for the interests of energy independence, economic development, national security, we paid for that. We continue to pay for it. So, today, we are asking you to stop, don’t do that anymore." And somebody is listening, finally.

AMY GOODMAN: Last week, President-elect Donald Trump expressed his support for the completion of the Dakota Access pipeline. In a communications briefing, Trump’s transition team said his support for the pipeline, quote, "has nothing to do with his personal investments," unquote. As of 2015, Trump had between $500,000 and a million dollars invested in the pipeline company, Energy Transfer Partners—although the Trump spokesperson, Hope Hicks, recently claimed Trump has sold off his shares in the company—also invested in Phillips 66, which would be involved with the pipeline if it’s built. What about this? And what does this transition of power mean for the pipeline? Could this just be reversed when Donald Trump becomes president?

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: You know, I see it as an opportunity for indigenous peoples, for tribes, to start a relationship with the president-elect and help him understand what is important to the first occupants of this nation and what we have paid for. His wealth is built off of our backs, and he doesn’t realize that, so we have to help him understand—and this is a huge opportunity for us—and help him understand that this decision that was made by the Corps of Engineers is the right decision. And you have to, at one time, put money aside and say, "What is it that the people want? What is it that we can do to make lives better for this country? Let’s look at the years that are yet to come, the 50 years ahead, and find out what we can do to make sure that there still is life here." And so, we have a huge opportunity in front of us to help president-elect understand our issues. And I look forward to a conversation, and just like I had with Kelcy Warren. You know, it’s—I have nothing personal against the president, nothing personal against Kelcy Warren. I have nothing personal against the senators and the congressmen of this state of North Dakota or the government. They have to realize that we are here, and we’ve always been here, and we’re not going anywhere. And there are some things that are just precious and important to us, and everybody has to understand that. And we’re not opposed to pipeline construction. We’re not opposed to economic development, energy independence. Just don’t continue to do it and expect us to pay for it. So, when this pipeline breaks, who’s going to pay for it? We will be the first ones to pay for it. And we’ve been paying for this nation’s wealth, safety and security from day one.

AMY GOODMAN: Chairman Archambault, what happens now at the resistance camps? They have swelled to thousands. You have the Dakota Access pipeline saying they’re moving ahead. What’s next?

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: The pipeline is not going to move ahead. The campers that are there can now enjoy the winter with their families at home. It is—the winters are going to get harsh here. And it’s time. You know, they had a purpose, and that purpose is served. That was to help us build awareness and show the support and stand with us. And so, today, it’s a beautiful day. And every day is a good day. And they have to realize that, that we’re no longer needing the purpose that they set out to do, so—and it’s OK. The company will not build beyond the easement that isn’t given to them. So, they can go home.

AMY GOODMAN: Chairman Archambault, you’re among the hundreds of people who have been arrested since the resistance grew. What happens now with the sheriff, with the police actions, that have become increasingly violent, from the water cannons to the sound cannons to the military equipment? Ten million dollars, we understand, has been spent, at least, on police activities.

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: Yeah. What we have to do is we have to try to rebuild relationships that were harmed. You have to understand that I live here in this community. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is not going anywhere, when this all disperses, the water protectors leave, the Energy Transfer Partners, Dakota Access pipelines leave, and we’re left with the residual effects. So it’s important for us to try to continue to establish relationships with the state and with the surrounding communities. And that includes Morton County and the Sheriff’s Department. Now, I do believe that there was an opportunity for the sheriff to better handle this situation, and there was a better—there was an opportunity for this governor of the state to better handle the situation. But the path they chose harmed relationships. So we have to try to re-establish and rebuild those relationships.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, Chairman Archambault, I want to thank you very much for joining us, joining us from the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. We thank you for this update. And, of course, we’ll continue to follow what takes place here. What do you say to those who say they’re not moving, they don’t have faith that the pipeline won’t go forward, they’re staying at the camps?

DAVE ARCHAMBAULT II: They have to pray. They have to continue to pray. And they have to start taking the lessons that were given at this camp. What did we learn at this camp? That prayer and peace is what’s going to help us be successful. It’s not the violent acts by people that build awareness. It’s the moral high ground that everybody needs to take. And if they want to stay, it’s going to be at their own risk. And there’s really no need for them to stay. They can go home and enjoy this winter, enjoy the holidays, if they celebrate them, with their families. And I’m sure their families are yearning for them. So, it’s OK now. And I understand their mistrust for the government and for this company, because, from the beginning, nothing was held to. You know, we asked the company to voluntarily stop, but they wouldn’t stop. So, I understand how they feel, but it’s OK. And the company did not get the easement, and so that’s going to be a process, a long, drawn-out process. Even if the company tries to reverse this and even if the president tries to reverse it, it’s not going to happen this winter, so it’s OK for them to go home.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you again, Chairman Dave Archambault, chair of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, speaking to us from Standing Rock in North Dakota. This is Democracy Now! When we come back, we’ll speak with one of the many veterans who have come to protect the water protectors. He comes from Arizona, Navajo, his grandfather a Navajo code talker. Stay with us.

Cumrags for Congress isn't a subtle title, but neither is the new mandate.

In the latest overt move to undermine Roe v. Wade, Texas is moving full speed ahead with a new rule requiring aborted fetuses to be buried or cremated. According to Texas Governor Greg Abbott, the new mandate, which is slated to take effect later this month, is aimed at "giving voice to the unborn."

In an effort to comply with that order more closely than state officials ever imagined, a woman named Jex Blackmore is urging Americans to mail their sperm-soaked rags, socks and condoms to Governor Abbott’s office. Since Texas lawmakers have decided to randomly assign personhood to aborted fetal tissue, it’s only fitting they should have a chance to grieve for the millions of lives lost whenever men spill their seed (which is a lot).

Under the name Cumrags for Congress, the project is meant to push back against a transparent effort to make women feel bad for having control over their own bodies and accessing a constitutional right. “This is an attempt to establish the legal precedent of fetal personhood,” Blackmore wrote in a Facebook post criticizing the law. Blackmore is a spokesperson for the Satanic Temple, but the project is unaffiliated with the church. The post goes on to encourage people to send their sperm-covered items directly to the Texas governor.

A photo accompanying the post features a sock covered in a viscous white substance, along with an envelope addressed to Abbott. A note—Blackmore’s suggestion for a message you might choose to accompany your message—reads, “These r babiez. Plz bury.”

Nearly identical fetal-burial regulations have been passed in Louisiana and Indiana. In the latter state, Governor Mike Pence, the incoming vice president, signed the measure into law.

Blackmore, speaking to Vice’s Broadly, says the Cumrags for Congress concept is “crass, humiliating, disgusting, a waste of resources, and absurd, just like this regulation." It’s also a brilliant way to make a point.

"The concept of the state mandating a non-medical ritual as part of the abortion procedure is offensive and crude, essentially demanding that all citizens adopt the moral, philosophical opinion that fetal tissue is comparable to a living human," she tells Broadly. "Fetal tissue has the 'potential' to become a human, but is not a human yet, does not have consciousness, and cannot exist without the mother host." She points out that semen and ova have the potential to become human life, yet "we do not mourn every ejaculation."

For the record, there’s some question about whether or not sending semen through the mail is fully legal. Speaking to Broadly, Blackmore said, “My understanding is that so long as the bodily fluid is not sent with the intent to injure or kill, and is sent is a very small amount in a 'leak proof container,' in a box clearly marked as containing fluid, then it's okay. At least, that's what the woman at the USPS office said when I contacted them."

This doesn’t count as legal advice, so if you decide to participate in the Cumrags for Congress movement, you might want to err on the side of caution. “Sending bodily fluid via postal service may get you in trouble, so do this at your own risk,” Blackmore advises. “However, feel free to supplement with gooey lotions and shampoos...the point is still valid.”

In other news, the Satanic Temple—which again, is unaffiliated with Blackmore's project—officially announced plans to file suit against Texas for the new ordinance, citing the same federal religious freedom laws the right-wing loves when it serves their purpose.

“Texas health officials are baldly imposing the view that the fetal tissue is elevated to personhood—a religious opinion that conflicts with our own,” Satanic Temple spokesperson Lucien Greaves said in a statement, according to Jezebel. “If Texas is going to treat the disposal of fetal tissue differently from the disposal of any other biological material, in contradiction to our own religious beliefs, they need to present a compelling state interest for doing so. Of course, there is no such state interest, and it’s perfectly clear the demand for fetal tissue burial is a punitive measure imposed by sadistic theocrats. It’s clear these officials deem harassment an acceptable form of pushing their misguided religious agendas.”

Cumrags for Congress isn't a subtle title, but neither is the new mandate.

In the latest overt move to undermine Roe v. Wade, Texas is moving full speed ahead with a new rule requiring aborted fetuses to be buried or cremated. According to Texas Governor Greg Abbott, the new mandate, which is slated to take effect later this month, is aimed at "giving voice to the unborn."

In an effort to comply with that order more closely than state officials ever imagined, a woman named Jex Blackmore is urging Americans to mail their sperm-soaked rags, socks and condoms to Governor Abbott’s office. Since Texas lawmakers have decided to randomly assign personhood to aborted fetal tissue, it’s only fitting they should have a chance to grieve for the millions of lives lost whenever men spill their seed (which is a lot).

Under the name Cumrags for Congress, the project is meant to push back against a transparent effort to make women feel bad for having control over their own bodies and accessing a constitutional right. “This is an attempt to establish the legal precedent of fetal personhood,” Blackmore wrote in a Facebook post criticizing the law. Blackmore is a spokesperson for the Satanic Temple, but the project is unaffiliated with the church. The post goes on to encourage people to send their sperm-covered items directly to the Texas governor.

A photo accompanying the post features a sock covered in a viscous white substance, along with an envelope addressed to Abbott. A note—Blackmore’s suggestion for a message you might choose to accompany your message—reads, “These r babiez. Plz bury.”

Nearly identical fetal-burial regulations have been passed in Louisiana and Indiana. In the latter state, Governor Mike Pence, the incoming vice president, signed the measure into law.

Blackmore, speaking to Vice’s Broadly, says the Cumrags for Congress concept is “crass, humiliating, disgusting, a waste of resources, and absurd, just like this regulation." It’s also a brilliant way to make a point.

"The concept of the state mandating a non-medical ritual as part of the abortion procedure is offensive and crude, essentially demanding that all citizens adopt the moral, philosophical opinion that fetal tissue is comparable to a living human," she tells Broadly. "Fetal tissue has the 'potential' to become a human, but is not a human yet, does not have consciousness, and cannot exist without the mother host." She points out that semen and ova have the potential to become human life, yet "we do not mourn every ejaculation."

For the record, there’s some question about whether or not sending semen through the mail is fully legal. Speaking to Broadly, Blackmore said, “My understanding is that so long as the bodily fluid is not sent with the intent to injure or kill, and is sent is a very small amount in a 'leak proof container,' in a box clearly marked as containing fluid, then it's okay. At least, that's what the woman at the USPS office said when I contacted them."

This doesn’t count as legal advice, so if you decide to participate in the Cumrags for Congress movement, you might want to err on the side of caution. “Sending bodily fluid via postal service may get you in trouble, so do this at your own risk,” Blackmore advises. “However, feel free to supplement with gooey lotions and shampoos...the point is still valid.”

In other news, the Satanic Temple—which again, is unaffiliated with Blackmore's project—officially announced plans to file suit against Texas for the new ordinance, citing the same federal religious freedom laws the right-wing loves when it serves their purpose.

“Texas health officials are baldly imposing the view that the fetal tissue is elevated to personhood—a religious opinion that conflicts with our own,” Satanic Temple spokesperson Lucien Greaves said in a statement, according to Jezebel. “If Texas is going to treat the disposal of fetal tissue differently from the disposal of any other biological material, in contradiction to our own religious beliefs, they need to present a compelling state interest for doing so. Of course, there is no such state interest, and it’s perfectly clear the demand for fetal tissue burial is a punitive measure imposed by sadistic theocrats. It’s clear these officials deem harassment an acceptable form of pushing their misguided religious agendas.”

Related Stories

]]>
http://www.alternet.org/activism/i-got-my-future-back-13-year-old-behind-standing-rock-movement-sheds-tears-joy-over'I Got My Future Back': One of the Young Leaders of the Standing Rock Movement Sheds Tears of Joyhttp://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/238847908/0/alternet_activism~I-Got-My-Future-Back-One-of-the-Young-Leaders-of-the-Standing-Rock-Movement-Sheds-Tears-of-Joy

When the US federal government announced that it would not be issuing the permit necessary for continuing construction of the Dakota Access pipeline, the Standing Rock Sioux and their allies were overjoyed. The announcement marked a decisive victory in combating environmental racism.

Over 200 Native Americans nations and their allies celebrated the unexpected turning point. Yet, at the center of it all is a 13-year-old water-warrior named Tokata Iron Eyes, who lives on the Standing Rock reservation.

"You helped start this movement, didn't you?" Social activist and author Naomi Klein asked Iron Eyes on December 4, to which the 13-year-old revealed the origin of the action against the Dakota Access Pipeline.

"This entire movement was brought up by the youth," Tokata Iron Eyes told Klein. "It just started so small and then this entire camp was built.. the easement for DAPL was denied... [I feel] like I got my future back."

When the US federal government announced that it would not be issuing the permit necessary for continuing construction of the Dakota Access pipeline, the Standing Rock Sioux and their allies were overjoyed. The announcement marked a decisive victory in combating environmental racism.

Over 200 Native Americans nations and their allies celebrated the unexpected turning point. Yet, at the center of it all is a 13-year-old water-warrior named Tokata Iron Eyes, who lives on the Standing Rock reservation.

"You helped start this movement, didn't you?" Social activist and author Naomi Klein asked Iron Eyes on December 4, to which the 13-year-old revealed the origin of the action against the Dakota Access Pipeline.

"This entire movement was brought up by the youth," Tokata Iron Eyes told Klein. "It just started so small and then this entire camp was built.. the easement for DAPL was denied... [I feel] like I got my future back."

On Sunday, the U.S. federal government announced it would not be issuing the necessary permit for continuing work on the Dakota Access Pipeline, which the Standing Rock Sioux and their allies have been protesting for months. For Bill McKibben, co-founder of 350.org, the resounding victory signaled a turning point for indigenous rights and environmental activism worldwide.

"Energy Transfer Partners, the company building the pipeline, is as wired as they come: its line of credit links it to virtually every bank you’ve ever heard of. And operating under a 'fast-track' permit process, it had managed to win most of its approvals and lay most of its pipe before opponents managed to mount an effective resistance," McKibben explained in an op-ed penned just after the announcement.

Reflecting on the remarkable "against-the-odds battle," McKibben revealed the opposition's success was largely due to the location of the action, where the Missouri and the Cannonball rivers intersect. Unity between hundreds of Native American nations also played a large role.

"It wasn’t standard-issue environmental lobbying, nor standard-issue protest, though there was certainly some of both (lawyers took the company to court, activists shut down bank branches)," the 350.org co-founder said. "When the announcement came today, there were thousands of military veterans on hand. Indigenous organizers are some of the finest organizers around the globe—they’ve been key to everything from the Keystone fight to battling plans for the world’s largest coal mine in Australia."

McKibben noted how difficult it was to ignore the mounting nostalgia as the protests continued and America's First People were subjected to torture reminiscent of centuries ago.

"When native American protesters sat down in front of bulldozers to try and protect ancestral graves, they were met with attack dogs—the pictures looked like Birmingham, Alabama, circa 1963. But it went back further than that: the encampment, with its teepees and woodsmoke hovering in the valley, looked like something out of an 1840s painting. With the exception that this was not just one tribe: this was pretty much all of native North America," he said.

McKibben attributes any slowdown of "the fossil fuel juggernaut" to these indigenous groups. But as Canada’s First Nations prepare for “Standing Rock North," activists question whether their victory will be short-lived.

"Trump, of course, can try and figure out a way to approve the pipeline right away, though the Obama administration has done its best to make that difficult," he explained. "But if Trump decides to do that, he’s up against people who have captured the imagination of the country."

McKibben arrived at Standing Rock on November 2, more than a month before the announcement was made.

"This is the center of the fight against environmental racism," he had said of the reservation. "This is like the navel of the universe right now."

On Sunday, the U.S. federal government announced it would not be issuing the necessary permit for continuing work on the Dakota Access Pipeline, which the Standing Rock Sioux and their allies have been protesting for months. For Bill McKibben, co-founder of 350.org, the resounding victory signaled a turning point for indigenous rights and environmental activism worldwide.

"Energy Transfer Partners, the company building the pipeline, is as wired as they come: its line of credit links it to virtually every bank you’ve ever heard of. And operating under a 'fast-track' permit process, it had managed to win most of its approvals and lay most of its pipe before opponents managed to mount an effective resistance," McKibben explained in an op-ed penned just after the announcement.

Reflecting on the remarkable "against-the-odds battle," McKibben revealed the opposition's success was largely due to the location of the action, where the Missouri and the Cannonball rivers intersect. Unity between hundreds of Native American nations also played a large role.

"It wasn’t standard-issue environmental lobbying, nor standard-issue protest, though there was certainly some of both (lawyers took the company to court, activists shut down bank branches)," the 350.org co-founder said. "When the announcement came today, there were thousands of military veterans on hand. Indigenous organizers are some of the finest organizers around the globe—they’ve been key to everything from the Keystone fight to battling plans for the world’s largest coal mine in Australia."

McKibben noted how difficult it was to ignore the mounting nostalgia as the protests continued and America's First People were subjected to torture reminiscent of centuries ago.

"When native American protesters sat down in front of bulldozers to try and protect ancestral graves, they were met with attack dogs—the pictures looked like Birmingham, Alabama, circa 1963. But it went back further than that: the encampment, with its teepees and woodsmoke hovering in the valley, looked like something out of an 1840s painting. With the exception that this was not just one tribe: this was pretty much all of native North America," he said.

McKibben attributes any slowdown of "the fossil fuel juggernaut" to these indigenous groups. But as Canada’s First Nations prepare for “Standing Rock North," activists question whether their victory will be short-lived.

"Trump, of course, can try and figure out a way to approve the pipeline right away, though the Obama administration has done its best to make that difficult," he explained. "But if Trump decides to do that, he’s up against people who have captured the imagination of the country."

McKibben arrived at Standing Rock on November 2, more than a month before the announcement was made.

"This is the center of the fight against environmental racism," he had said of the reservation. "This is like the navel of the universe right now."

On Sunday, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers announced it would not grant the final permit needed for the Dakota Access Pipeline to be completed. Instead, officials said, an environmental impact review will be conducted to investigate the possibility of routing the planned 1,170-mile pipeline project in a way to prevent crossing the Missouri River.

Following months of protests, the decision is a big victory for the Standing Rock Sioux tribe and its allies, who say the pipeline will threaten drinking water supplies. The pipeline, 30 inches in diameter, is slated to transport around 470,000 barrels of oil a day, with a capacity of up to 570,000 barrels.

"Although we have had continuing discussion and exchanges of new information with the Standing Rock Sioux and Dakota Access, it's clear that there’s more work to do," Jo-Ellen Darcy, the Corps' assistant secretary for civil works said in a statement. “The best way to complete that work responsibly and expeditiously is to explore alternate routes for the pipeline crossing."

While this is good news for activists, proponents of the pipeline have a powerful ally in President-elect Donald Trump, who said Thursday that he supports its completion.

"Mr. Trump expressed his support for the Dakota Access Pipeline, which has met or exceeded all environmental standards set forth by four states and the Army Corps of Engineers," said North Dakota Republican senator John Hoeven, on Thursday, after meeting with Trump's transition team to discuss the pipeline.

House Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Raúl M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.) hailed the announcement, saying that "President Obama has handled a difficult situation with care and concern for the equities involved." He also expressed hope that President-elect Trump would act accordingly. "It now falls to the Trump administration to follow the law, treat this entire process with the respect and seriousness it demands, and honor the sacrifices of the Americans who put themselves in harm’s way to demand justice at Standing Rock," he said.

But for now, victory, even if it may be temporary, is with the Sioux.

"For months now, Standing Rock has been the moral center of the country," said Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org. "The Obama administration recognized that moral stature today; it also recognized the environmental racism implicit in this misbegotten pipeline. Such thanks to the Indigenous communities that organized so prayerfully and powerfully; we will all follow their lead and stay vigilant."

The Army Corps just blocked the route of the Dakota Access Pipeline — in a huge win for protestors https://t.co/odlLqkGEcq

U.S. Secretary for the Interior Sally Jewell said in a statement that the Corps' "thoughtful approach ... ensures that there will be an in-depth evaluation of alternative routes for the pipeline and a closer look at potential impacts" and "underscores that tribal rights reserved in treaties and federal law, as well as Nation-to-Nation consultation with tribal leaders, are essential components of the analysis to be undertaken in the environmental impact statement going forward."

"The fight is not over by any means," said activist and "Gasland" filmmaker Josh Fox. "We still have hundreds of pipelines to fight across America. But I am so grateful to the Standing Rock Nation and everyone at all the camps for showing us the way. It’s given us a template. Our movement is grounded in indigenous values of respect, prayer, love, community and resilience. Our whole culture needs to learn from Standing Rock."

On Sunday, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers announced it would not grant the final permit needed for the Dakota Access Pipeline to be completed. Instead, officials said, an environmental impact review will be conducted to investigate the possibility of routing the planned 1,170-mile pipeline project in a way to prevent crossing the Missouri River.

Following months of protests, the decision is a big victory for the Standing Rock Sioux tribe and its allies, who say the pipeline will threaten drinking water supplies. The pipeline, 30 inches in diameter, is slated to transport around 470,000 barrels of oil a day, with a capacity of up to 570,000 barrels.

"Although we have had continuing discussion and exchanges of new information with the Standing Rock Sioux and Dakota Access, it's clear that there’s more work to do," Jo-Ellen Darcy, the Corps' assistant secretary for civil works said in a statement. “The best way to complete that work responsibly and expeditiously is to explore alternate routes for the pipeline crossing."

While this is good news for activists, proponents of the pipeline have a powerful ally in President-elect Donald Trump, who said Thursday that he supports its completion.

"Mr. Trump expressed his support for the Dakota Access Pipeline, which has met or exceeded all environmental standards set forth by four states and the Army Corps of Engineers," said North Dakota Republican senator John Hoeven, on Thursday, after meeting with Trump's transition team to discuss the pipeline.

House Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Raúl M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.) hailed the announcement, saying that "President Obama has handled a difficult situation with care and concern for the equities involved." He also expressed hope that President-elect Trump would act accordingly. "It now falls to the Trump administration to follow the law, treat this entire process with the respect and seriousness it demands, and honor the sacrifices of the Americans who put themselves in harm’s way to demand justice at Standing Rock," he said.

But for now, victory, even if it may be temporary, is with the Sioux.

"For months now, Standing Rock has been the moral center of the country," said Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org. "The Obama administration recognized that moral stature today; it also recognized the environmental racism implicit in this misbegotten pipeline. Such thanks to the Indigenous communities that organized so prayerfully and powerfully; we will all follow their lead and stay vigilant."

The Army Corps just blocked the route of the Dakota Access Pipeline — in a huge win for protestors https://t.co/odlLqkGEcq

U.S. Secretary for the Interior Sally Jewell said in a statement that the Corps' "thoughtful approach ... ensures that there will be an in-depth evaluation of alternative routes for the pipeline and a closer look at potential impacts" and "underscores that tribal rights reserved in treaties and federal law, as well as Nation-to-Nation consultation with tribal leaders, are essential components of the analysis to be undertaken in the environmental impact statement going forward."

"The fight is not over by any means," said activist and "Gasland" filmmaker Josh Fox. "We still have hundreds of pipelines to fight across America. But I am so grateful to the Standing Rock Nation and everyone at all the camps for showing us the way. It’s given us a template. Our movement is grounded in indigenous values of respect, prayer, love, community and resilience. Our whole culture needs to learn from Standing Rock."

We don’t want to alarm you or anything, but it’s beginning to look like Donald Trump does not know how this whole presidenting thing works. And since he has the curiosity level of a pet rock, chances don’t seem great he’ll be learning anytime soon. His week was a combination of gaffes, bizarre confessions and weirdly tone-deaf phone calls that appear to be setting off international incidents. He seems to miss campaigning, and held a rally in Ohio to crow again about all the other people he vanquished when he beat Hillary. He tweeted how he’s just going to unconstitutionally toss flag burners out of the country. (Whee, this presidenting thing is fun!) And he also took the time to oh-so-presidentially tweet his detail-free “big announcement” about how he’s going to step back from running his companies, so no more “conflicts of interest!” Poof, they’ll just magically disappear.

Here are five of Trump's headscratchingly stupid moments during the week that was.

1. He had a succession of bizarre phone convos with foreign leaders.

Though he is an avowed teetotaler, the president-elect appears to be doing the equivalent of drinking and dialing world leaders, or at least drinking and picking up the phone, if it's true that the Taiwanese president called him, not the other way around. By all appearances, he did not have the foggiest notion that speaking with Taiwanese leader Tsai Ing-wen might cause a teeny problem with China, or that it broke four decades of diplomatic protocol.

Protocol schmotocol, he might say. He’s a rulebreaker, a rebel, which is so much easier when you don't bother to inform yourself about the rules. Freedom from knowledge is just so darn liberating.

Earlier in the day, he had spoken with the murderous Philippines leader Rodrigo Duterte, who is rapidly becoming an international pariah. But Trumpie described the conversation as “engaging and animated.” Frighteningly, the two aspiring authoritarians share a view about the violence with which the drug war must be waged. Duterte just pretty much has people murdered, about 4,800 of them so far.

A brief chat with the Pakistani prime minister was all Trump needed to make a complete about-face on that nation. The country he once described as “not our friend,” he suddenly claimed was “fantastic.”

See? Easy peasy, this presidenting thing.

2. He appointed a fellow conspiracy theorist to helm the Health and Human Services Department.

It’s bad enough that Donald Trump is a sucker for a good conspiracy theory (birtherism, massive voter fraud, etc.), but now he seems to be surrounding himself with conspiracy theorists as well (well, conspiracy theorists and billionaires).

Georgia Rep. Tom Price is just about the most disastrous pick to head the Department of Health and Human Services that can be imagined. He is not only a sworn foe of Obamacare, he opposes Medicare and will seek to dismantle it given half the chance. He is a doctor, a so-called upholder of the Hippocratic Oath, but opposes all forms of government involvement in medicine, which he, of course, calls socialism.

But Price does not just have vile plans to dismantle the nation’s safety net, he has nutty ideas as well. Granted, being a medical doctor is no inoculation against being a wacko (look at Ben Carson), but Price has been touted as a member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. This horrifyingly right-wing group of ideologues have vowed “to fight socialized medicine and to fight the government takeover of medicine.” Its members are urged to refuse to treat Medicare patients and the group rejects required vaccination programs in schools. That's not just evil, it's colossally stupid for anyone with a passing acquaintance with public health.

It’s hard to know which cabinet appointment is most horrifying this week, but Price might have beat out predatory banker Steven Mnuchin at Treasury, or bottom feeder Wilbur Ross at Commerce. Unlike those two blatant profiteers, Price has been put in charge of a henhouse he seems intent on destroying.

3. He held a bizarre campaign rally in Ohio, appearing to be stuck in a time machine from three weeks ago.

The Donald called the event in Cincinnati Thursday a "thank you" rally, but it was eerily similar to a campaign rally, and he kind of forgot the whole thank-you part. The crowd chanted “Lock her up,” when Hillary Clinton’s name came up, which it did because the Trumpster bragged about the great fun he had “fighting” and beating her. He pranced and preened about the stage, basking in the glow of adoration, revisiting old grudges and spouting nationalism. “There is no global anthem, no global currency, no certificate of global citizenship,” Trump said apropos of nothing. “We pledge allegiance to one flag. And that flag is the American flag.” That spurred the crowd’s other favorite chant, “U-S-A, U-S-A.”

No one seemed the least bit convinced when he read off the teleprompter to call for some sort of unity now that he will be president, because he said so. “It is time and the people are angry,” he rambled. “They are angry. And they are going to get together.” They are going to get together because he said so. The hall was so silent you could hear a pin drop.

But before pursuing all that unity stuff, he just wanted to make fun of a weeping woman, and spent some time mocking ABC’s Martha Raddatz for her choked-up performance on election night. “How about when a major anchor who hosted a debate started crying when she realized that we won? How about that?” he grinned. Then, like a teenage bully, he imitated her sobs, saying “No, tell me this isn’t true.”

Very presidential.

4. He told a truly baffling story about the Carrier deal, apparently unaware that it makes him look more awful than usual.

In Indiana to gloat about his supposed genius deal to save maybe 1,000 jobs at the Carrier air conditioning plant, which he accomplished through huge tax breaks and corporate giveaways, Trump addressed a roomful of factory workers. He decided this might be a good time to mention he really hadn’t intended to keep those Carrier jobs from going to Mexico in the first place. Huh?

The president-elect recounted how he had been watching the nightly news—“I won’t say which one because I don’t want to give them credit”—when a “gentleman worker, a great guy, handsome guy” invoked a promise Trump had supposedly made on the campaign trail. The man, a Carrier employee, said Trump had vowed to keep the Indianapolis factory open. “I never thought I made that promise—not with Carrier.… I made it for everybody else,” Trump confessed. But why?

Seems like a little bit of diarrhea of the mouth.

5. One of his surrogates just flat-out confirmed that facts don’t matter anymore.

The Trump era helped usher in the “post-truth” world we now find ourselves living in. The tweeter-in-chief spreads unfounded conspiracy theories, spins minor victories into major coups, and as we have seen, sometimes in an unguarded moment spews some accidental truth about how he can’t believe how many people actually believe anything he says. But still, you’re not supposed to just come out and say that truth and facts don’t matter.

But damned if CNN Trump surrogate Scottie Nell Hughes didn’t manage to confirm all of our worst fears this week when she said, “There’s no such thing, unfortunately, anymore as facts,” on the Diane Rehm Show on WAMU, an NPR affiliate.

She was explaining the truth according to Trump to her fellow aghast panelists when it comes to the tweeter-in-chief’s claim of, “millions of fraudulent voters,” a claim which is both false and stupid, particularly when you’re fighting a recount effort.

Here is what she purported to be her logic: “Mr. Trump’s tweet amongst a certain crowd, a large — a large part of the population, are truth. When he says that millions of people illegally voted, he has some — in his — amongst him and his supporters, and people believe they have facts to back that up. Those that do not like Mr. Trump, they say that those are lies, and there’s no facts to back it up."

We don’t want to alarm you or anything, but it’s beginning to look like Donald Trump does not know how this whole presidenting thing works. And since he has the curiosity level of a pet rock, chances don’t seem great he’ll be learning anytime soon. His week was a combination of gaffes, bizarre confessions and weirdly tone-deaf phone calls that appear to be setting off international incidents. He seems to miss campaigning, and held a rally in Ohio to crow again about all the other people he vanquished when he beat Hillary. He tweeted how he’s just going to unconstitutionally toss flag burners out of the country. (Whee, this presidenting thing is fun!) And he also took the time to oh-so-presidentially tweet his detail-free “big announcement” about how he’s going to step back from running his companies, so no more “conflicts of interest!” Poof, they’ll just magically disappear.

Here are five of Trump's headscratchingly stupid moments during the week that was.

1. He had a succession of bizarre phone convos with foreign leaders.

Though he is an avowed teetotaler, the president-elect appears to be doing the equivalent of drinking and dialing world leaders, or at least drinking and picking up the phone, if it's true that the Taiwanese president called him, not the other way around. By all appearances, he did not have the foggiest notion that speaking with Taiwanese leader Tsai Ing-wen might cause a teeny problem with China, or that it broke four decades of diplomatic protocol.

Protocol schmotocol, he might say. He’s a rulebreaker, a rebel, which is so much easier when you don't bother to inform yourself about the rules. Freedom from knowledge is just so darn liberating.

Earlier in the day, he had spoken with the murderous Philippines leader Rodrigo Duterte, who is rapidly becoming an international pariah. But Trumpie described the conversation as “engaging and animated.” Frighteningly, the two aspiring authoritarians share a view about the violence with which the drug war must be waged. Duterte just pretty much has people murdered, about 4,800 of them so far.

A brief chat with the Pakistani prime minister was all Trump needed to make a complete about-face on that nation. The country he once described as “not our friend,” he suddenly claimed was “fantastic.”

See? Easy peasy, this presidenting thing.

2. He appointed a fellow conspiracy theorist to helm the Health and Human Services Department.

It’s bad enough that Donald Trump is a sucker for a good conspiracy theory (birtherism, massive voter fraud, etc.), but now he seems to be surrounding himself with conspiracy theorists as well (well, conspiracy theorists and billionaires).

Georgia Rep. Tom Price is just about the most disastrous pick to head the Department of Health and Human Services that can be imagined. He is not only a sworn foe of Obamacare, he opposes Medicare and will seek to dismantle it given half the chance. He is a doctor, a so-called upholder of the Hippocratic Oath, but opposes all forms of government involvement in medicine, which he, of course, calls socialism.

But Price does not just have vile plans to dismantle the nation’s safety net, he has nutty ideas as well. Granted, being a medical doctor is no inoculation against being a wacko (look at Ben Carson), but Price has been touted as a member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. This horrifyingly right-wing group of ideologues have vowed “to fight socialized medicine and to fight the government takeover of medicine.” Its members are urged to refuse to treat Medicare patients and the group rejects required vaccination programs in schools. That's not just evil, it's colossally stupid for anyone with a passing acquaintance with public health.

It’s hard to know which cabinet appointment is most horrifying this week, but Price might have beat out predatory banker Steven Mnuchin at Treasury, or bottom feeder Wilbur Ross at Commerce. Unlike those two blatant profiteers, Price has been put in charge of a henhouse he seems intent on destroying.

3. He held a bizarre campaign rally in Ohio, appearing to be stuck in a time machine from three weeks ago.

The Donald called the event in Cincinnati Thursday a "thank you" rally, but it was eerily similar to a campaign rally, and he kind of forgot the whole thank-you part. The crowd chanted “Lock her up,” when Hillary Clinton’s name came up, which it did because the Trumpster bragged about the great fun he had “fighting” and beating her. He pranced and preened about the stage, basking in the glow of adoration, revisiting old grudges and spouting nationalism. “There is no global anthem, no global currency, no certificate of global citizenship,” Trump said apropos of nothing. “We pledge allegiance to one flag. And that flag is the American flag.” That spurred the crowd’s other favorite chant, “U-S-A, U-S-A.”

No one seemed the least bit convinced when he read off the teleprompter to call for some sort of unity now that he will be president, because he said so. “It is time and the people are angry,” he rambled. “They are angry. And they are going to get together.” They are going to get together because he said so. The hall was so silent you could hear a pin drop.

But before pursuing all that unity stuff, he just wanted to make fun of a weeping woman, and spent some time mocking ABC’s Martha Raddatz for her choked-up performance on election night. “How about when a major anchor who hosted a debate started crying when she realized that we won? How about that?” he grinned. Then, like a teenage bully, he imitated her sobs, saying “No, tell me this isn’t true.”

Very presidential.

4. He told a truly baffling story about the Carrier deal, apparently unaware that it makes him look more awful than usual.

In Indiana to gloat about his supposed genius deal to save maybe 1,000 jobs at the Carrier air conditioning plant, which he accomplished through huge tax breaks and corporate giveaways, Trump addressed a roomful of factory workers. He decided this might be a good time to mention he really hadn’t intended to keep those Carrier jobs from going to Mexico in the first place. Huh?

The president-elect recounted how he had been watching the nightly news—“I won’t say which one because I don’t want to give them credit”—when a “gentleman worker, a great guy, handsome guy” invoked a promise Trump had supposedly made on the campaign trail. The man, a Carrier employee, said Trump had vowed to keep the Indianapolis factory open. “I never thought I made that promise—not with Carrier.… I made it for everybody else,” Trump confessed. But why?

Seems like a little bit of diarrhea of the mouth.

5. One of his surrogates just flat-out confirmed that facts don’t matter anymore.

The Trump era helped usher in the “post-truth” world we now find ourselves living in. The tweeter-in-chief spreads unfounded conspiracy theories, spins minor victories into major coups, and as we have seen, sometimes in an unguarded moment spews some accidental truth about how he can’t believe how many people actually believe anything he says. But still, you’re not supposed to just come out and say that truth and facts don’t matter.

But damned if CNN Trump surrogate Scottie Nell Hughes didn’t manage to confirm all of our worst fears this week when she said, “There’s no such thing, unfortunately, anymore as facts,” on the Diane Rehm Show on WAMU, an NPR affiliate.

She was explaining the truth according to Trump to her fellow aghast panelists when it comes to the tweeter-in-chief’s claim of, “millions of fraudulent voters,” a claim which is both false and stupid, particularly when you’re fighting a recount effort.

Here is what she purported to be her logic: “Mr. Trump’s tweet amongst a certain crowd, a large — a large part of the population, are truth. When he says that millions of people illegally voted, he has some — in his — amongst him and his supporters, and people believe they have facts to back that up. Those that do not like Mr. Trump, they say that those are lies, and there’s no facts to back it up."

]]>
http://www.alternet.org/economy/plan-build-stop-outsourcing-movementA Blueprint to Stop the Hemorrhaging of Jobs from the U.S.http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/239540436/0/alternet_activism~A-Blueprint-to-Stop-the-Hemorrhaging-of-Jobs-from-the-US

Donald Trump inadvertently has opened the door to building a massive national movement to stop the outsourcing of jobs to low wage countries. While 800 to 1000 jobs have been given a reprieve at Carrier, there are tens of thousands of other jobs that are slated to move to low wage areas abroad—manufacturing and service jobs alike. The wide-spread destruction of decent paying jobs creates an enormous opportunity for the labor movement, the Sanders forces and other progressive allies to organize a powerful response.

Outsourcing is not an act of God. It does not blindly flow from the mechanical forces of global competition. In fact, these days it has very little at all to do with international competition. Instead, Wall Street elites and top corporate executives consciously press for plant relocations in order to extract more wealth for themselves. The weapon of choice is stock buybacks—buying back the shares of their own company in order to boost the share price.(Reducing the number of shares spreads earnings over fewer shares and therefore raises their price.)

In Carrier for example, United Technologies, the parent company, recently instituted a $10 billion stock buyback plan (and $2 billion more in dividends) that put millions of dollars into the pockets of hedge fund investors and top corporate executives. They want to ship jobs to Mexico in order to help finance these stock repurchases, thereby inflating the value of their own stock.

“In 2014, United Technologies gave its former CEO Louis Chenevert a golden parachute worth over $172 million. Last year, the company’s five highest paid executives made over $50 million. The firm also spent $12 billion to inflate its stock price instead of using that money to invest in new plants and workers."

Over the past decade 93 percent of compensation the top United Technologies executives received came from stock incentives, reported Matt Hopkins, research associate at University of Massachusetts, Lowell in a personal communication on Dec. 2.

The United Technologies buyback is not an isolated phenomenon. By the time of the 2007-08 crash, 75 percent of all corporate profits in the economy went to stock buybacks.(See Professor William Lazonick's "Profits Without Prosperity" for the definitive account.)

Trump just announced he will try to pressure Rexnord, another Indiana firm which is planning to shift 300 jobs to Mexico. In 2015 Rexnord instituted a $200 million stock buyback which will be partially financed by this move.

The country is littered with abandoned facilities that were once competitive enterprises but have now been sacrificed to enrich hedge funds and CEOs. It's time to develop a coherent strategy to fight back.

The Makings of a New Plant Closing Movement

This is a golden moment to build a massive anti-Wall Street "Stop the Outsourcing" movement. Trump claims to have saved 1,000 jobs at Carrier. But what about the tens of thousands of other jobs that are headed abroad? What about the millions of other workers who fear a similar fate? These workers, their families and their communities need a voice. With carefully organized support these working people could be linked together into a significant national movement. Without such a movement, Trump may become their voice.

Here's a tentative game plan:

Step 1: Make a list

The AFL-CIO should immediately create a list of every facility in the country that is scheduling job shifts to low wage areas abroad. We need to know the U.S. location, the number of jobs, the pay scale, and where the jobs are going. That information should be made available on their website to the public.

Step 2: Run ads

Progressive labor unions, the Sanders forces (Our Revolutions, etc.) should buy TV ad time, newspaper space and social media ads to provide an ongoing list of these facilities and jobs at risk. The banner might be: "President Trump: What about Our Jobs? Keep Your Word."

Step 3: Formulate legislation

The Sanders/Warren Democrats should prepare legislation both to stop outsourcing (see the Sanders Outsourcing Prevention Act) and to outlaw mass stock buybacks, (which before 1982 were illegal and considered stock manipulation).

Step 4: Send outsourced workers to White House vigils

Money should be raised to send representatives from each facility facing a shutdown to the White House for highly visible demonstrations. It should be possible to establish an ongoing weekly vigil in front of the White House. There are more than enough victims and allies to make this happen.

Step 5: Get in Trump's Face

Send delegations of impacted workers to follow Trump wherever he goes. There should be posters at every Trump stop constantly demanding that that he keep his word to these workers. The media should be alerted each and every time.

Step 6: Lobby

Set up lobbing days for these workers at key congressional offices across the country to support the legislation.

Step 7: Invite allies

Encourage allies to join the fray. This could be a progressive rallying point that links working people and other progressives more closely together.

Step 8: Don't stop. Don't quit.

Yes, it will take money, energy and will power to organize such a project. It will take time for this effort to catch on. But there's never been a better time to do it. Nothing will ever change for the better unless we mobilize a mass base. The danger is that if we don't, Trump will capture this issue and lure even more working people his way. If we stay on it, however, these workers and their families will see this movement as a way forward—as a ray of hope. It sure beats waiting for your pink slip.

Donald Trump inadvertently has opened the door to building a massive national movement to stop the outsourcing of jobs to low wage countries. While 800 to 1000 jobs have been given a reprieve at Carrier, there are tens of thousands of other jobs that are slated to move to low wage areas abroad—manufacturing and service jobs alike. The wide-spread destruction of decent paying jobs creates an enormous opportunity for the labor movement, the Sanders forces and other progressive allies to organize a powerful response.

Outsourcing is not an act of God. It does not blindly flow from the mechanical forces of global competition. In fact, these days it has very little at all to do with international competition. Instead, Wall Street elites and top corporate executives consciously press for plant relocations in order to extract more wealth for themselves. The weapon of choice is stock buybacks—buying back the shares of their own company in order to boost the share price.(Reducing the number of shares spreads earnings over fewer shares and therefore raises their price.)

In Carrier for example, United Technologies, the parent company, recently instituted a $10 billion stock buyback plan (and $2 billion more in dividends) that put millions of dollars into the pockets of hedge fund investors and top corporate executives. They want to ship jobs to Mexico in order to help finance these stock repurchases, thereby inflating the value of their own stock.

“In 2014, United Technologies gave its former CEO Louis Chenevert a golden parachute worth over $172 million. Last year, the company’s five highest paid executives made over $50 million. The firm also spent $12 billion to inflate its stock price instead of using that money to invest in new plants and workers."

Over the past decade 93 percent of compensation the top United Technologies executives received came from stock incentives, reported Matt Hopkins, research associate at University of Massachusetts, Lowell in a personal communication on Dec. 2.

The United Technologies buyback is not an isolated phenomenon. By the time of the 2007-08 crash, 75 percent of all corporate profits in the economy went to stock buybacks.(See Professor William Lazonick's "Profits Without Prosperity" for the definitive account.)

Trump just announced he will try to pressure Rexnord, another Indiana firm which is planning to shift 300 jobs to Mexico. In 2015 Rexnord instituted a $200 million stock buyback which will be partially financed by this move.

The country is littered with abandoned facilities that were once competitive enterprises but have now been sacrificed to enrich hedge funds and CEOs. It's time to develop a coherent strategy to fight back.

The Makings of a New Plant Closing Movement

This is a golden moment to build a massive anti-Wall Street "Stop the Outsourcing" movement. Trump claims to have saved 1,000 jobs at Carrier. But what about the tens of thousands of other jobs that are headed abroad? What about the millions of other workers who fear a similar fate? These workers, their families and their communities need a voice. With carefully organized support these working people could be linked together into a significant national movement. Without such a movement, Trump may become their voice.

Here's a tentative game plan:

Step 1: Make a list

The AFL-CIO should immediately create a list of every facility in the country that is scheduling job shifts to low wage areas abroad. We need to know the U.S. location, the number of jobs, the pay scale, and where the jobs are going. That information should be made available on their website to the public.

Step 2: Run ads

Progressive labor unions, the Sanders forces (Our Revolutions, etc.) should buy TV ad time, newspaper space and social media ads to provide an ongoing list of these facilities and jobs at risk. The banner might be: "President Trump: What about Our Jobs? Keep Your Word."

Step 3: Formulate legislation

The Sanders/Warren Democrats should prepare legislation both to stop outsourcing (see the Sanders Outsourcing Prevention Act) and to outlaw mass stock buybacks, (which before 1982 were illegal and considered stock manipulation).

Step 4: Send outsourced workers to White House vigils

Money should be raised to send representatives from each facility facing a shutdown to the White House for highly visible demonstrations. It should be possible to establish an ongoing weekly vigil in front of the White House. There are more than enough victims and allies to make this happen.

Step 5: Get in Trump's Face

Send delegations of impacted workers to follow Trump wherever he goes. There should be posters at every Trump stop constantly demanding that that he keep his word to these workers. The media should be alerted each and every time.

Step 6: Lobby

Set up lobbing days for these workers at key congressional offices across the country to support the legislation.

Step 7: Invite allies

Encourage allies to join the fray. This could be a progressive rallying point that links working people and other progressives more closely together.

Step 8: Don't stop. Don't quit.

Yes, it will take money, energy and will power to organize such a project. It will take time for this effort to catch on. But there's never been a better time to do it. Nothing will ever change for the better unless we mobilize a mass base. The danger is that if we don't, Trump will capture this issue and lure even more working people his way. If we stay on it, however, these workers and their families will see this movement as a way forward—as a ray of hope. It sure beats waiting for your pink slip.

Produced by Robert Redford and Paul Allen, a new six-part series looks at a new breed of outlaws on the high seas—and the unlikely heroes trying to stop them.

Impossible to control or police, the oceans that cover three fifths of the globe and border 146 countries are home to a new breed of outlaw mercenaries who threaten not just marine life but the entire planet.

"Ocean Warriors" is a new Animal Planet series from executive producers Robert Redford and Paul Allen that brings viewers to the edge of this vast frontier—and a battle critical to Earth’s survival.

A six-part series, "Ocean Warriors" features unlikely heroes with a passion for justice as they track down these criminals in high-adrenaline missions, and premieres Sunday, December 4 with back-to-back episodes at 9pm and 10pm ET/PT, continuing on December 11 and December 18.

Each fast-paced episode of "Ocean Warriors" puts the offenders in the sights of dedicated activists, scientists and investigators who put their lives on the line every day to stop those who are wreaking havoc on our oceans, from Tanzania to Thailand to Antarctica and beyond.

Series episodes will include Enforcement, Who’s the Bad Guy, Engage the Enemy, Truth and Lies, Life and Death and Perseverance.

The young men and women of Sea Shepherd chase a notorious, battle-hardened poaching ship through the dense ice of the Antarctic Sea despite the very real threat of violence and hazardous waters.

Animal Planet’s new series “Ocean Warriors premieres December 4.

In Tanzania, a conservation biologist strives to save the coral reefs from blast fishing, whose explosive impact could wipe out the marine life that sustains 18 million people.

In the Pacific, Greenpeace patrols the waters for illegal shark fishing, exploring deep within a commercial vessel to discover a prolific and illegal bounty.

An environmental journalist goes to Thailand, where illegal poachers are devastating a $7 billion national fishing industry as they pillage the ancestral fishing grounds.

Produced by Robert Redford and Paul Allen, a new six-part series looks at a new breed of outlaws on the high seas—and the unlikely heroes trying to stop them.

Impossible to control or police, the oceans that cover three fifths of the globe and border 146 countries are home to a new breed of outlaw mercenaries who threaten not just marine life but the entire planet.

"Ocean Warriors" is a new Animal Planet series from executive producers Robert Redford and Paul Allen that brings viewers to the edge of this vast frontier—and a battle critical to Earth’s survival.

A six-part series, "Ocean Warriors" features unlikely heroes with a passion for justice as they track down these criminals in high-adrenaline missions, and premieres Sunday, December 4 with back-to-back episodes at 9pm and 10pm ET/PT, continuing on December 11 and December 18.

Each fast-paced episode of "Ocean Warriors" puts the offenders in the sights of dedicated activists, scientists and investigators who put their lives on the line every day to stop those who are wreaking havoc on our oceans, from Tanzania to Thailand to Antarctica and beyond.

Series episodes will include Enforcement, Who’s the Bad Guy, Engage the Enemy, Truth and Lies, Life and Death and Perseverance.

The young men and women of Sea Shepherd chase a notorious, battle-hardened poaching ship through the dense ice of the Antarctic Sea despite the very real threat of violence and hazardous waters.

Animal Planet’s new series “Ocean Warriors premieres December 4.

In Tanzania, a conservation biologist strives to save the coral reefs from blast fishing, whose explosive impact could wipe out the marine life that sustains 18 million people.

In the Pacific, Greenpeace patrols the waters for illegal shark fishing, exploring deep within a commercial vessel to discover a prolific and illegal bounty.

An environmental journalist goes to Thailand, where illegal poachers are devastating a $7 billion national fishing industry as they pillage the ancestral fishing grounds.